HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) vs Radeon PRO WX 2100

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon PRO WX 2100 with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), including specs and performance data.

PRO WX 2100
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 35 Watt
4.67
+1315%

PRO WX 2100 outperforms HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) by a whopping 1315% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6581317
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.30no data
Power efficiency9.44no data
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Gen. 6 Sandy Bridge (2011)
GPU code nameLexaSandy Bridge
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date4 June 2017 (7 years ago)1 May 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores5126
Core clock speed925 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speed1219 MHz1100 MHz
Number of transistors2,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Wattno data
Texture fill rate39.01no data
Floating-point processing power1.248 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8no data
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width64 Bit64/128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth48 GB/sno 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 Connectors1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPortno data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)10.1
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

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 HD95−100
+1257%
7
−1257%

Cost per frame, $

1080p1.57no data

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Far Cry 5 12−14 0−1
Fortnite 27−30
+2600%
1−2
−2600%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Valorant 55−60
+123%
24−27
−123%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+690%
10
−690%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Dota 2 35−40
+290%
10−11
−290%
Far Cry 5 12−14 0−1
Fortnite 27−30
+2600%
1−2
−2600%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Metro Exodus 8−9 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Valorant 55−60
+123%
24−27
−123%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Dota 2 35−40
+290%
10−11
−290%
Far Cry 5 12−14 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Valorant 55−60
+123%
24−27
−123%
Fortnite 27−30
+2600%
1−2
−2600%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+1650%
2−3
−1650%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6 0−1
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+1450%
2−3
−1450%
Valorant 50−55
+1567%
3−4
−1567%
Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Fortnite 9−10 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Valorant 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Fortnite 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

This is how PRO WX 2100 and HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) compete in popular games:

  • PRO WX 2100 is 1257% faster in 1080p

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the PRO WX 2100 is 1450% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, PRO WX 2100 surpassed HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) in all 31 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.67 0.33
Recency 4 June 2017 1 May 2011
Chip lithography 14 nm 32 nm

PRO WX 2100 has a 1315.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO WX 2100 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon PRO WX 2100 is a workstation card while HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) is a notebook one.

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 PRO WX 2100
Radeon PRO WX 2100
Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)

Other comparisons

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.


3.6
50 votes

Rate Radeon PRO WX 2100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7
85 votes

Rate HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon PRO WX 2100 or HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.