UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) vs Radeon HD 8310E

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8310E with UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU), including specs and performance data.

HD 8310E
2013
25 Watt
0.88

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) outperforms HD 8310E by a whopping 150% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in performance ranking1091817
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Gen. 11 (2021)
GPU code nameKalindiGen. 11
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date23 April 2013 (11 years ago)11 January 2021 (3 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores12824
Core clock speed300 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data800 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt4.8 - 10 Watt
Texture fill rate2.400no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon HD 8310E and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

InterfaceIGPno data
WidthIGPno data

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 typeSystem Sharedno data
Maximum RAM amountSystem Sharedno data
Memory bus widthSystem Sharedno data
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno data
Shared memoryno data+

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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12_1
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131no data

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 HD5−6
−160%
13
+160%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Battlefield 5 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−150%
20−22
+150%
Hitman 3 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−135%
40−45
+135%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
−150%
35−40
+150%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Battlefield 5 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−150%
20−22
+150%
Hitman 3 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−135%
40−45
+135%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
−150%
20−22
+150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
−150%
35−40
+150%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−150%
20−22
+150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−135%
40−45
+135%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
−150%
10−11
+150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
−150%
35−40
+150%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Hitman 3 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%

This is how HD 8310E and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) is 160% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.88 2.20
Recency 23 April 2013 11 January 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 4 Watt

The UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8310E in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8310E is a desktop card while UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) is a notebook one.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon HD 8310E
Radeon HD 8310E
Intel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU)
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU)

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 30 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8310E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 44 votes

Rate UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.