HD Graphics 2500 vs Radeon R9 M385
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R9 M385 with HD Graphics 2500, including specs and performance data.
R9 M385 outperforms HD Graphics 2500 by a whopping 670% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 680 | 1248 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) | Generation 7.0 (2012−2013) |
| GPU code name | Strato | Ivy Bridge GT1 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 5 May 2015 (10 years ago) | 1 April 2012 (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 cores | 896 | 48 |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 650 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | 1150 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,080 million | 392 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | unknown |
| Texture fill rate | 56.00 | 6.900 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.792 TFLOPS | 0.1104 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 1 |
| TMUs | 56 | 6 |
| L1 Cache | 224 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | no 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).
| Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | IGP |
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 type | GDDR5 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | no 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| Eyefinity | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | + | - |
| HD3D | + | - |
| PowerTune | + | - |
| DualGraphics | + | - |
| TrueAudio | + | - |
| ZeroCore | + | - |
| Switchable graphics | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 11.1 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.0 |
| OpenCL | Not Listed | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.1.80 |
| Mantle | + | - |
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 HD | 60−65
+650%
| 8
−650%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+1000%
|
2−3
−1000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+950%
|
2−3
−950%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+1000%
|
2−3
−1000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+360%
|
5−6
−360%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+138%
|
8−9
−138%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
+121%
|
27−30
−121%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+950%
|
2−3
−950%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+1000%
|
2−3
−1000%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 85−90
+617%
|
12
−617%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
+250%
|
12−14
−250%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+360%
|
5−6
−360%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+138%
|
8−9
−138%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+133%
|
6−7
−133%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
+121%
|
27−30
−121%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+950%
|
2−3
−950%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
+250%
|
12−14
−250%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+360%
|
5−6
−360%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+138%
|
8−9
−138%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+133%
|
6−7
−133%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
+121%
|
27−30
−121%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
+233%
|
3−4
−233%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
+1167%
|
3−4
−1167%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+414%
|
7−8
−414%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+671%
|
7−8
−671%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+500%
|
2−3
−500%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+14.3%
|
14−16
−14.3%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 24−27
+733%
|
3−4
−733%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
This is how R9 M385 and HD Graphics 2500 compete in popular games:
- R9 M385 is 650% 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 R9 M385 is 1167% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, R9 M385 surpassed HD Graphics 2500 in all 33 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.93 | 0.64 |
| Recency | 5 May 2015 | 1 April 2012 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 22 nm |
R9 M385 has a 670.3% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 3 years.
HD Graphics 2500, on the other hand, has a 27.3% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon R9 M385 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 2500 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R9 M385 is a notebook graphics card while HD Graphics 2500 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
