HD Graphics 4000 vs Radeon R9 295X2

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 295X2 with HD Graphics 4000, including specs and performance data.

R9 295X2
2014, $1,499
8 GB GDDR5, 500 Watt
20.87
+1832%

R9 295X2 outperforms HD Graphics 4000 by a whopping 1832% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking3021124
Place by popularitynot in top-10060
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.18no data
Power efficiency3.211.84
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Generation 7.0 (2012−2013)
GPU code nameVesuviusIvy Bridge GT2
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date29 April 2014 (11 years ago)14 May 2012 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,499 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 cores2816 ×2128
Core clock speedno data650 MHz
Boost clock speed1018 MHz1000 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million1,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm22 nm
Power consumption (TDP)500 Wattunknown
Texture fill rate179.2 ×216.00
Floating-point processing power5.733 TFLOPS ×20.256 TFLOPS
ROPs64 ×22
TMUs176 ×216
L1 Cache704 KBno data
L2 Cache1024 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 2.1 x16no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16Ring Bus
Length307 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2 x 8-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 amount8 GB ×2System Shared
Memory bus width512 Bit ×2System Shared
Memory clock speed1250 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth640 GB/s ×2no 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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data
Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1211.1 (11_0)
Shader Model6.35.0
OpenGL4.64.0
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan++

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.

R9 295X2 20.87
+1832%
HD Graphics 4000 1.08

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.

R9 295X2 8734
+1824%
Samples: 544
HD Graphics 4000 454
Samples: 46643

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.

R9 295X2 21197
+4316%
HD Graphics 4000 480

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:

900p230−240
+1817%
12
−1817%
Full HD210−220
+1809%
11
−1809%

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.14no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21
+0%
21
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 17
+0%
17
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how R9 295X2 and HD Graphics 4000 compete in popular games:

  • R9 295X2 is 1817% faster in 900p
  • R9 295X2 is 1809% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 43 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.87 1.08
Recency 29 April 2014 14 May 2012
Chip lithography 28 nm 22 nm

R9 295X2 has a 1832.4% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

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

The Radeon R9 295X2 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 295X2 is a desktop graphics card while HD Graphics 4000 is a notebook one.

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 R9 295X2
Radeon R9 295X2
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.


3.6 105 votes

Rate Radeon R9 295X2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 5878 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 295X2 or HD Graphics 4000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.