HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) vs Radeon Pro 560X
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro 560X with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), including specs and performance data.
Pro 560X outperforms HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) by a whopping 2564% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 535 | 1368 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 9.02 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Gen. 6 Sandy Bridge (2011) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 21 | Sandy Bridge |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 16 July 2018 (7 years ago) | 1 May 2011 (15 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1024 | 6 |
| Core clock speed | 1004 MHz | 350 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1100 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 64.26 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.056 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | no data |
| TMUs | 64 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 1024 KB | no 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).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no 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 type | GDDR5 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64/128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1270 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 81.28 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 10.1 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | - |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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 | 41
+486%
| 7
−486%
|
| 1440p | 43
+4200%
| 1−2
−4200%
|
| 4K | 17 | 0−1 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+4600%
|
1−2
−4600%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 16−18 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 43
+4200%
|
1−2
−4200%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+4600%
|
1−2
−4600%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 37
+3600%
|
1−2
−3600%
|
| Fortnite | 66
+3200%
|
2−3
−3200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 53
+1225%
|
4−5
−1225%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
+2600%
|
1−2
−2600%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+357%
|
7−8
−357%
|
| Valorant | 85−90
+238%
|
24−27
−238%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 36
+3500%
|
1−2
−3500%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+4600%
|
1−2
−4600%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 86
+760%
|
10
−760%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
| Dota 2 | 71
+610%
|
10−11
−610%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 33
+3200%
|
1−2
−3200%
|
| Fortnite | 40
+3900%
|
1−2
−3900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50
+1150%
|
4−5
−1150%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
+2600%
|
1−2
−2600%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 33
+3200%
|
1−2
−3200%
|
| Metro Exodus | 19 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40
+471%
|
7−8
−471%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 34
+580%
|
5−6
−580%
|
| Valorant | 85−90
+238%
|
24−27
−238%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 33
+3200%
|
1−2
−3200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
| Dota 2 | 69
+590%
|
10−11
−590%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 31
+3000%
|
1−2
−3000%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 36
+800%
|
4−5
−800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+357%
|
7−8
−357%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 20
+300%
|
5−6
−300%
|
| Valorant | 26
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 32
+3100%
|
1−2
−3100%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+467%
|
3−4
−467%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 57 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 11 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+1075%
|
4−5
−1075%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
+3200%
|
3−4
−3200%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+2000%
|
1−2
−2000%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+1100%
|
1−2
−1100%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 18−20 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30
+2900%
|
1−2
−2900%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 13
−7.7%
|
14−16
+7.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 45−50
+2200%
|
2−3
−2200%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+3200%
|
1−2
−3200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
This is how Pro 560X and HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) compete in popular games:
- Pro 560X is 486% faster in 1080p
- Pro 560X is 4200% faster in 1440p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Pro 560X is 2200% faster.
- in Grand Theft Auto V, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) is 8% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Pro 560X performs better in 24 tests (92%)
- HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) performs better in 1 test (4%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (4%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 8.79 | 0.33 |
| Recency | 16 July 2018 | 1 May 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 32 nm |
Pro 560X has a 2564% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 129% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon Pro 560X is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon Pro 560X is a mobile workstation graphics card while HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
