HD Graphics 2000 vs Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge)

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) and HD Graphics 2000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 (Bristol Ridge)
2016
12 Watt
1.92
+256%

R7 (Bristol Ridge) outperforms HD Graphics 2000 by a whopping 256% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9091228
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.99no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.2 (2016)Generation 6.0 (2011)
GPU code nameBristol RidgeSandy Bridge GT1
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 June 2016 (8 years ago)1 February 2011 (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 cores51248
Core clock speedno data850 MHz
Boost clock speed900 MHz1350 MHz
Number of transistors2410 Million189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12-45 Wattunknown
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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
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 width64/128 BitSystem 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 and SDK 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

Synthetic benchmark performance

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 (Bristol Ridge) 1.92
+256%
HD Graphics 2000 0.54

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.

R7 (Bristol Ridge) 754
+254%
HD Graphics 2000 213

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.

R7 (Bristol Ridge) 5568
+522%
HD Graphics 2000 896

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 HD15
+36.4%
11
−36.4%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Fortnite 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Valorant 35−40
+35.7%
27−30
−35.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+124%
16−18
−124%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Dota 2 16
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Fortnite 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 5
+400%
1−2
−400%
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Valorant 35−40
+35.7%
27−30
−35.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Dota 2 14
+27.3%
10−12
−27.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Valorant 35−40
+35.7%
27−30
−35.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Valorant 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

This is how R7 (Bristol Ridge) and HD Graphics 2000 compete in popular games:

  • R7 (Bristol Ridge) is 36% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the R7 (Bristol Ridge) is 1100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R7 (Bristol Ridge) is ahead in 34 tests (97%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.92 0.54
Recency 1 June 2016 1 February 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm

R7 (Bristol Ridge) has a 255.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 2000 in performance tests.

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 (Bristol Ridge)
Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge)
Intel HD Graphics 2000
HD Graphics 2000

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.


3.6 42 votes

Rate Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 1364 votes

Rate HD Graphics 2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) or HD Graphics 2000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.