HD Graphics vs Radeon Pro WX 4150

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro WX 4150 with HD Graphics, including specs and performance data.


Pro WX 4150
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
6.17
+757%

Pro 4150 outperforms HD Graphics by a whopping 757% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6321227
Place by popularitynot in top-10060
Power efficiency9.501.58
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Generation 7.0 (2012−2013)
GPU code nameBaffinIvy Bridge GT1
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date1 March 2017 (9 years ago)1 April 2012 (14 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 cores89648
Core clock speed1002 MHz650 MHz
Boost clock speed1053 MHz1050 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million392 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm22 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate58.976.300
Floating-point processing power1.887 TFLOPS0.1008 TFLOPS
ROPs161
TMUs566
L1 Cache224 KBno data
L2 Cache1024 KBno 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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP
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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1500 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth96 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

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.

DirectX12 (12_0)11.1 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.0
OpenGL4.64.0
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.80

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.

Pro WX 4150 6.17
+757%
HD Graphics 0.72

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Pro WX 4150 2550
+744%
Samples: 72
HD Graphics 302
Samples: 823

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 27−30
+800%
3−4
−800%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+900%
2−3
−900%
Fortnite 35−40
+850%
4−5
−850%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
+800%
2−3
−800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Valorant 70−75
+775%
8−9
−775%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 27−30
+800%
3−4
−800%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+758%
12−14
−758%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Dota 2 50−55
+900%
5−6
−900%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+900%
2−3
−900%
Fortnite 35−40
+850%
4−5
−850%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
+800%
2−3
−800%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+1000%
2−3
−1000%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Valorant 70−75
+775%
8−9
−775%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 27−30
+800%
3−4
−800%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Dota 2 50−55
+900%
5−6
−900%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+900%
2−3
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Valorant 70−75
+775%
8−9
−775%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 35−40
+850%
4−5
−850%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+860%
5−6
−860%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7 0−1
Metro Exodus 6−7 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+875%
4−5
−875%
Valorant 70−75
+775%
8−9
−775%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6 0−1
Far Cry 5 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5 0−1
Valorant 30−35
+933%
3−4
−933%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 21−24
+1000%
2−3
−1000%
Far Cry 5 5−6 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7 0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite 6−7 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.17 0.72
Recency 1 March 2017 1 April 2012
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 35 Watt

Pro WX 4150 has a 757% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 57% more advanced lithography process.

HD Graphics, on the other hand, has 43% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro WX 4150 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro WX 4150 is a mobile workstation graphics card while HD Graphics is a desktop one.

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.


3.8 26 votes

Rate Radeon Pro WX 4150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 3002 votes

Rate HD Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro WX 4150 or HD Graphics, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.