HD Graphics vs Radeon R7 265

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 265 and HD Graphics, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 265
2014, $149
4 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
9.68
+1244%

R7 265 outperforms HD Graphics by a whopping 1244% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4941227
Place by popularitynot in top-10044
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.71no data
Power efficiency4.971.58
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Generation 7.0 (2012−2013)
GPU code namePitcairnIvy Bridge GT1
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 February 2014 (12 years ago)1 April 2012 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores102448
Core clock speedno data650 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHz1050 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million392 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm22 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate59.206.300
Floating-point processing power1.894 TFLOPS0.1008 TFLOPS
ROPs321
TMUs646
L1 Cache256 KBno data
L2 Cache512 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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length210 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno 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 width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1400 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth179.2 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1211.1 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.64.0
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan-1.1.80

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.

R7 265 9.68
+1244%
HD Graphics 0.72

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.

R7 265 5220
+1640%
HD Graphics 300

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.68 0.72
Recency 13 February 2014 1 April 2012
Chip lithography 28 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 35 Watt

R7 265 has a 1244% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

HD Graphics, on the other hand, has a 27% more advanced lithography process, and 329% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 265 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics in performance tests.

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.


3.2 387 votes

Rate Radeon R7 265 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 3037 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 R7 265 or HD Graphics, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.