HD Graphics 2000 vs Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) with HD Graphics 2000, including specs and performance data.

R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
2014
3.04
+453%

R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) outperforms HD Graphics 2000 by a whopping 453% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7671212
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)Generation 6.0 (2011)
GPU code nameKaveri SpectreSandy Bridge GT1
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date14 January 2014 (10 years ago)1 February 2011 (13 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 cores51248
Core clock speed720 MHz850 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1350 MHz
Number of transistorsno data189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no dataunknown
Texture fill rateno data8.100
Floating-point processing powerno data0.1296 TFLOPS
ROPsno data1
TMUsno data6

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 1.0 x16

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 typeno dataSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountno dataSystem Shared
Memory bus widthno dataSystem Shared
Memory clock speedno dataSystem Shared
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 dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Modelno data4.1
OpenGLno data3.1
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

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 HD18
+63.6%
11
−63.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 5−6 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Hitman 3 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+188%
8−9
−188%
Metro Exodus 4−5 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+39.3%
27−30
−39.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 5−6 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Hitman 3 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+188%
8−9
−188%
Metro Exodus 4−5 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27
+200%
9−10
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+39.3%
27−30
−39.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Hitman 3 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+188%
8−9
−188%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6
−50%
9−10
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+39.3%
27−30
−39.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Hitman 3 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

This is how R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) and HD Graphics 2000 compete in popular games:

  • R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is 64% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is 300% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD Graphics 2000 is 50% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is ahead in 28 tests (97%)
  • HD Graphics 2000 is ahead in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.04 0.55
Recency 14 January 2014 1 February 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm

R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) has a 452.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is a desktop card while HD Graphics 2000 is a notebook one.


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 R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
Intel HD Graphics 2000
HD Graphics 2000

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.


3.2 14 votes

Rate Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 1285 votes

Rate HD Graphics 2000 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.