CMP 30HX vs Radeon HD 8210

Place in the ranking	1236	260
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	21.53
Power efficiency	4.20	11.59
Architecture	GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	Kalindi	TU116
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	31 January 2014 (10 years ago)	25 February 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	128	1408
Core clock speed	300 MHz	1530 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1785 MHz
Number of transistors	1,178 million	6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	8 Watt	125 Watt
Texture fill rate	2.400	157.1
Floating-point processing power	0.0768 TFLOPS	5.027 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	48
TMUs	8	88

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Interface	IGP	PCIe 3.0 x4
Length	no data	229 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	System Shared	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	6 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	336.0 GB/s
Shared memory	+	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

No outputs

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.3	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2
CUDA	-	7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

HD 8210 0.49

CMP 30HX 21.12
+4210%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

HD 8210 190

CMP 30HX 8135
+4182%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD

−4100%

210−220
+4100%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

3.80

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

2−3

−4150%

85−90
+4150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −3900%	120−130 +3900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −4150%	85−90 +4150%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −4150%	85−90 +4150%
Hitman 3	4−5 −4150%	170−180 +4150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −3650%	300−310 +3650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −4150%	170−180 +4150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −4186%	1200−1250 +4186%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −3900%	120−130 +3900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −4150%	85−90 +4150%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −4150%	85−90 +4150%
Hitman 3	4−5 −4150%	170−180 +4150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −3650%	300−310 +3650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −4150%	170−180 +4150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −3789%	350−400 +3789%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −4186%	1200−1250 +4186%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −3900%	120−130 +3900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −4150%	85−90 +4150%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −4150%	85−90 +4150%
Hitman 3	4−5 −4150%	170−180 +4150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −3650%	300−310 +3650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −4150%	170−180 +4150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −3789%	350−400 +3789%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −4186%	1200−1250 +4186%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Hitman 3	6−7 −4067%	250−260 +4067%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2−3 −4150%	85−90 +4150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−4150%

85−90
+4150%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −3900%	40−45 +3900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−4150%

85−90
+4150%

This is how HD 8210 and CMP 30HX compete in popular games:

CMP 30HX is 4100% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.49	21.12
Recency	31 January 2014	25 February 2021
Chip lithography	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	8 Watt	125 Watt

HD 8210 has 1462.5% lower power consumption.

CMP 30HX, on the other hand, has a 4210.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The CMP 30HX is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8210 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8210 is a notebook card while CMP 30HX is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.