HD Graphics 510 vs Radeon R5 M430

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

R5 M430
2016
4 GB DDR3
1.68
+23.5%

Radeon R5 M430 outperforms HD Graphics 510 by a significant 24% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking896972
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.040.04
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)Gen. 9 Skylake (2015−2016)
GPU code nameMarsSkylake GT1
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 May 2016 (8 years ago)1 September 2015 (8 years ago)
Current price$749 $476

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R5 M430 and HD Graphics 510 have a nearly equal value for money.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores32012
Core clock speed955 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1030 MHz950 MHz
Number of transistors690 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown15 Watt
Texture fill rate17.1011.40
Floating-point performance659.2 gflops182.4 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon R5 M430 and HD Graphics 510 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x1

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 typeDDR3LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amount4 GB32 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64/128 Bit
Memory clock speed1746 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth16 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.21.1.97

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

R5 M430 1.68
+23.5%
HD Graphics 510 1.36

Radeon R5 M430 outperforms HD Graphics 510 by 24% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

R5 M430 648
+3.7%
HD Graphics 510 625

Radeon R5 M430 outperforms HD Graphics 510 by 4% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

R5 M430 1689
+99.4%
HD Graphics 510 847

Radeon R5 M430 outperforms HD Graphics 510 by 99% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

R5 M430 4697
+23.7%
HD Graphics 510 3798

Radeon R5 M430 outperforms HD Graphics 510 by 24% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R5 M430 1004
+61.7%
HD Graphics 510 621

Radeon R5 M430 outperforms HD Graphics 510 by 62% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R5 M430 5493
HD Graphics 510 5664
+3.1%

HD Graphics 510 outperforms Radeon R5 M430 by 3% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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 HD16
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how R5 M430 and HD Graphics 510 compete in popular games:

  • R5 M430 is 33% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the R5 M430 is 100% faster than the HD Graphics 510.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R5 M430 is ahead in 21 test (55%)
  • there's a draw in 17 tests (45%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.68 1.36
Recency 1 May 2016 1 September 2015
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm

The Radeon R5 M430 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 510 in performance tests.


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 R5 M430
Radeon R5 M430
Intel HD Graphics 510
HD Graphics 510

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.


3.1 347 votes

Rate Radeon R5 M430 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 341 vote

Rate HD Graphics 510 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.