Radeon 540 vs UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) with Radeon 540, including specs and performance data.

UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
2021
4.11
+25.7%

Graphics 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) outperforms 540 by a significant 26% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking701764
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.10
Power efficiencyno data5.27
ArchitectureGen. 12 (2021−2023)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeLexa
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date11 May 2021 (4 years ago)20 April 2017 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$79

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 cores32384
Core clock speed350 MHz1183 MHz
Boost clock speed1450 MHz1124 MHz
Number of transistorsno data2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data28.39
Floating-point processing powerno data0.9085 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data24
L1 Cacheno data96 KB
L2 Cacheno data512 KB

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x8
Lengthno data145 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data1 GB
Memory bus widthno data32 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data24 GB/s
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 Connectorsno data2x DisplayPort 1.4a

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12_112 (12_0)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.1
Vulkan-1.3

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 HD17
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
1440p30
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
4K12
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data6.58
1440pno data3.76
4Kno data8.78

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 53
+32.5%
40−45
−32.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Hogwarts Legacy 12
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 18
+28.6%
14−16
−28.6%
Counter-Strike 2 34
+25.9%
27−30
−25.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Far Cry 5 14
+40%
10−11
−40%
Fortnite 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Forza Horizon 5 16
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+28.6%
14−16
−28.6%
Valorant 55−60
+26.7%
45−50
−26.7%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 16
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 15
+50%
10−11
−50%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+28.3%
60−65
−28.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Dota 2 36
+33.3%
27−30
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 13
+30%
10−11
−30%
Fortnite 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 11
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+28.6%
14−16
−28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Valorant 55−60
+26.7%
45−50
−26.7%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 15
+50%
10−11
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Dota 2 33
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Far Cry 5 12
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+28.6%
14−16
−28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Valorant 55−60
+26.7%
45−50
−26.7%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+25.9%
27−30
−25.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Valorant 45−50
+34.3%
35−40
−34.3%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Valorant 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 12
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

This is how UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) and Radeon 540 compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 42% faster in 1080p
  • UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 43% faster in 1440p
  • UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 33% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.11 3.27
Recency 11 May 2021 20 April 2017
Chip lithography 10 nm 14 nm

UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) has a 25.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 540 in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is a notebook graphics card while Radeon 540 is a desktop 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.


Intel UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
AMD Radeon 540
Radeon 540

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.


3.1 30 votes

Rate UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 50 votes

Rate Radeon 540 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) or Radeon 540, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.