HD Graphics 400 vs Radeon RX Vega M GH
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX Vega M GH and HD Graphics 400, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
M GH outperforms HD Graphics 400 by a whopping 1407% 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 | 376 | 1146 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 12.07 | 13.35 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Generation 8.0 (2014−2015) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 22 | Braswell GT1 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 February 2018 (8 years ago) | 1 April 2015 (11 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 | 1536 | 96 |
| Core clock speed | 1063 MHz | 320 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1190 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5,000 million | 189 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 6 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 114.2 | 7.200 |
| Floating-point processing power | 3.656 TFLOPS | 0.1152 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 2 |
| TMUs | 96 | 12 |
| L1 Cache | 384 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 1024 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 |
| Interface | IGP | Ring 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 type | HBM2 | DDR3L |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 1024 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 204.8 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 | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.3 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | + |
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.
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.
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 | 59
+1867%
| 3−4
−1867%
|
| 1440p | 38
+1800%
| 2−3
−1800%
|
| 4K | 28
+2700%
| 1−2
−2700%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+1700%
|
5−6
−1700%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 39
+1850%
|
2−3
−1850%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 30−35
+1600%
|
2−3
−1600%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 81
+1520%
|
5−6
−1520%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+1700%
|
5−6
−1700%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30
+2900%
|
1−2
−2900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
+1633%
|
3−4
−1633%
|
| Fortnite | 85−90
+1660%
|
5−6
−1660%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+1550%
|
4−5
−1550%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 47
+1467%
|
3−4
−1467%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
+1867%
|
3−4
−1867%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
+1500%
|
8−9
−1500%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 66
+1550%
|
4−5
−1550%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+1700%
|
5−6
−1700%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 200−210
+1625%
|
12−14
−1625%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 23
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Dota 2 | 108
+1443%
|
7−8
−1443%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 51
+1600%
|
3−4
−1600%
|
| Fortnite | 85−90
+1660%
|
5−6
−1660%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+1550%
|
4−5
−1550%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35
+1650%
|
2−3
−1650%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 60
+1900%
|
3−4
−1900%
|
| Metro Exodus | 32
+1500%
|
2−3
−1500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
+1867%
|
3−4
−1867%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 60
+1900%
|
3−4
−1900%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
+1500%
|
8−9
−1500%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 60
+1900%
|
3−4
−1900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 23
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Dota 2 | 95
+1483%
|
6−7
−1483%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 47
+1467%
|
3−4
−1467%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+1550%
|
4−5
−1550%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
+1867%
|
3−4
−1867%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 34
+1600%
|
2−3
−1600%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
+1500%
|
8−9
−1500%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 85−90
+1660%
|
5−6
−1660%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+1450%
|
2−3
−1450%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 110−120
+1571%
|
7−8
−1571%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 24−27
+2500%
|
1−2
−2500%
|
| Metro Exodus | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 150−160
+1450%
|
10−11
−1450%
|
| Valorant | 150−160
+1490%
|
10−11
−1490%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 43
+2050%
|
2−3
−2050%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+1650%
|
2−3
−1650%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+1850%
|
2−3
−1850%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+2300%
|
1−2
−2300%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 35−40
+1700%
|
2−3
−1700%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 27−30
+2800%
|
1−2
−2800%
|
| Metro Exodus | 11 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
+2100%
|
1−2
−2100%
|
| Valorant | 85−90
+1680%
|
5−6
−1680%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21
+2000%
|
1−2
−2000%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 55−60
+1800%
|
3−4
−1800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 16−18
+1600%
|
1−2
−1600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+2700%
|
1−2
−2700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 16−18
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
This is how RX Vega M GH and HD Graphics 400 compete in popular games:
- RX Vega M GH is 1867% faster in 1080p
- RX Vega M GH is 1800% faster in 1440p
- RX Vega M GH is 2700% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 15.67 | 1.04 |
| Recency | 1 February 2018 | 1 April 2015 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 6 Watt |
RX Vega M GH has a 1407% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 years.
HD Graphics 400, on the other hand, has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 1567% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX Vega M GH is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 400 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
