UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs vs Radeon HD 8330

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8330 with UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs, including specs and performance data.

HD 8330
2013
15 Watt
0.69

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs outperforms HD 8330 by a whopping 559% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1172652
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.1811.25
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameKalindiTiger Lake Xe
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date13 August 2013 (11 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 years ago)

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 cores12848
Core clock speed497 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1450 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate3.976no data
Floating-point processing power0.1272 TFLOPSno data
ROPs4no data
TMUs8no data

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).

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

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

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 8330 0.69
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 4.55
+559%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

HD 8330 530
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 3510
+562%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

HD 8330 1813
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 10650
+488%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 8330 351
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 2321
+561%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

HD 8330 2672
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 15992
+499%

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 HD10
−70%
17
+70%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−267%
11
+267%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−225%
12−14
+225%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−1200%
12−14
+1200%
Hitman 3 5−6
−100%
10
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−227%
36
+227%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 12−14
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−183%
16−18
+183%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−50%
45−50
+50%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−225%
12−14
+225%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−1200%
12−14
+1200%
Hitman 3 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−173%
30−33
+173%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 12−14
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−183%
17
+183%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−70%
16−18
+70%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−50%
45−50
+50%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−225%
12−14
+225%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Hitman 3 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−9.1%
12
+9.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−167%
16
+167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+25%
8
−25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−50%
45−50
+50%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 12−14

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−600%
7−8
+600%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 4−5
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Hitman 3 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−1300%
27−30
+1300%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 2−3

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12
+0%
12
+0%
Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how HD 8330 and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 70% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD 8330 is 25% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 1300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD 8330 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is ahead in 34 tests (55%)
  • there's a draw in 27 tests (44%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.69 4.55
Recency 13 August 2013 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 28 Watt

HD 8330 has 86.7% lower power consumption.

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs, on the other hand, has a 559.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8330 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8330 is a desktop card while UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 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 8330
Radeon HD 8330
Intel UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs

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.


2.8 177 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8330 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 453 votes

Rate UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 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.