HD Graphics 4000 vs Radeon R7 M275DX

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 M275DX and HD Graphics 4000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 M275DX
2014
3.34
+183%

R7 M275DX outperforms HD Graphics 4000 by a whopping 183% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7451077
Place by popularitynot in top-10049
Power efficiencyno data1.80
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)Generation 7.0 (2012−2013)
GPU code nameno dataIvy Bridge GT2
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date4 June 2014 (10 years ago)14 May 2012 (12 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 cores896128
Core clock speedno data650 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1000 MHz
Number of transistorsno data1,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm22 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no dataunknown
Texture fill rateno data16.00
Floating-point processing powerno data0.256 TFLOPS
ROPsno data2
TMUsno data16

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 dataRing Bus

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 typeDDR3System 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 dataPortable Device Dependent
Eyefinity+-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-
Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1211.1 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.0
OpenGLno data4.0
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-+

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 M275DX 3.34
+183%
HD Graphics 4000 1.18

  • Other tests
    • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
    • 3DMark Vantage Performance
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
    • 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
    • 3DMark Ice Storm GPU

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.

R7 M275DX 3553
+579%
HD Graphics 4000 523

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 M275DX 8309
+181%
HD Graphics 4000 2959

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 M275DX 1932
+302%
HD Graphics 4000 480

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.

R7 M275DX 11160
+196%
HD Graphics 4000 3769

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

R7 M275DX 86346
+94.8%
HD Graphics 4000 44324

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:

900p30−35
+150%
12
−150%
Full HD24
+118%
11
−118%

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Atomic Heart 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Atomic Heart 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Battlefield 5 10−12 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Fortnite 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+150%
6−7
−150%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Valorant 45−50
+45.5%
30−35
−45.5%
Atomic Heart 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Battlefield 5 10−12 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 47
+124%
21
−124%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Dota 2 30−33
+76.5%
17
−76.5%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Fortnite 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+150%
6−7
−150%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Valorant 45−50
+45.5%
30−35
−45.5%
Battlefield 5 10−12 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Dota 2 30−33
+87.5%
16−18
−87.5%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+150%
6−7
−150%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Valorant 45−50
+45.5%
30−35
−45.5%
Fortnite 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3 0−1
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+243%
7−8
−243%
Valorant 30−35
+933%
3−4
−933%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Fortnite 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Atomic Heart 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Valorant 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 9−10 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Fortnite 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

This is how R7 M275DX and HD Graphics 4000 compete in popular games:

  • R7 M275DX is 150% faster in 900p
  • R7 M275DX is 118% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Valorant, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the R7 M275DX is 933% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, R7 M275DX surpassed HD Graphics 4000 in all 44 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.34 1.18
Recency 4 June 2014 14 May 2012
Chip lithography 28 nm 22 nm

R7 M275DX has a 183.1% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 years.

HD Graphics 4000, on the other hand, has a 27.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R7 M275DX is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 4000 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 M275DX
Radeon R7 M275DX
Intel HD Graphics 4000
HD Graphics 4000

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.


2.5
2 votes

Rate Radeon R7 M275DX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1
5419 votes

Rate HD Graphics 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 M275DX or HD Graphics 4000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.