HD Graphics 520 vs Radeon HD 8770M

Place in the ranking	778	866
Place by popularity	not in top-100	47
Power efficiency	no data	9.94
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)
GPU code name	Mars	Skylake GT2
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 April 2013 (11 years ago)	1 September 2015 (9 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 cores	384	192
Core clock speed	775 MHz	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	825 MHz	900 MHz
Number of transistors	950 million	189 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm+
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	19.80	21.60
Floating-point processing power	0.6336 TFLOPS	0.3456 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	3
TMUs	24	24

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).

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	Ring Bus

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	GDDR5	DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	32 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	1125 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	72 GB/s	no 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 Connectors

No outputs

Portable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	+

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 8770M 3.00
+38.9%

HD Graphics 520 2.16

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 8770M 1934
+49.5%

HD Graphics 520 1294

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 8770M 8530
+49.1%

HD Graphics 520 5722

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:

900p	27−30 +35%	20 −35%
Full HD	54 +440%	10 −440%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Elden Ring	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +27.3%	10−12 −27.3%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 +22.2%	9−10 −22.2%
Valorant	1−2	0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Dota 2	8−9 −37.5%	11 +37.5%
Elden Ring	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +21.4%	14−16 −21.4%
Fortnite	16−18 +54.5%	10−12 −54.5%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +27.3%	10−12 −27.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	8−9 +167%	3 −167%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 +28.6%	21−24 −28.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 +22.2%	9−10 −22.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +267%	3 −267%
Valorant	1−2	0−1
World of Tanks	50−55 +76.7%	30 −76.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Dota 2	8−9 −175%	22 +175%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +21.4%	14−16 −21.4%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +27.3%	10−12 −27.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 +28.6%	21−24 −28.6%
Valorant	1−2	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	1−2	0−1
Elden Ring	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Grand Theft Auto V	1−2	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +40%	14−16 −40%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
World of Tanks	21−24 +50%	14−16 −50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Valorant	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Elden Ring	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Fortnite	2−3	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1
Valorant	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%

This is how HD 8770M and HD Graphics 520 compete in popular games:

HD 8770M is 35% faster in 900p
HD 8770M is 440% 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 High Preset, the HD 8770M is 267% faster.
in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD Graphics 520 is 175% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

HD 8770M is ahead in 40 tests (78%)
HD Graphics 520 is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
there's a draw in 9 tests (18%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.00	2.16
Recency	1 April 2013	1 September 2015
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	32 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm

HD 8770M has a 38.9% higher aggregate performance score.

HD Graphics 520, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon HD 8770M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 520 in performance tests.

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