AMD Radeon HD 6410D IGP vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 520M
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon HD 6410D IGP and NVIDIA GeForce GT 520M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 6410D IGP
- Videocard is newer: launch date 5 month(s) later
- 3.3x more pipelines: 160 vs 48
- Around 10% better floating-point performance: 142.08 gflops vs 129.02 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 32 nm vs 40 nm
- Around 58% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 117 vs 74
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 20 June 2011 vs 5 January 2011 |
Pipelines | 160 vs 48 |
Floating-point performance | 142.08 gflops vs 129.02 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 32 nm vs 40 nm |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 117 vs 74 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520M
- Around 51% higher core clock speed: 672 MHz vs 444 MHz
- Around 66% higher texture fill rate: 5.9 billion / sec vs 3.55 GTexel / s
- 5.4x lower typical power consumption: 12 Watt vs 65 Watt
- Around 20% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 285 vs 237
- 2.3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 1326 vs 587
- Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 536 vs 415
- Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 536 vs 415
- 2.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1731 vs 646
- 2.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1731 vs 646
- Around 62% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2380 vs 1468
- Around 62% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2380 vs 1468
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 672 MHz vs 444 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 5.9 billion / sec vs 3.55 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 12 Watt vs 65 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 285 vs 237 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 1326 vs 587 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 536 vs 415 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 536 vs 415 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1731 vs 646 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1731 vs 646 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2380 vs 1468 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2380 vs 1468 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon HD 6410D IGP
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 520M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon HD 6410D IGP | NVIDIA GeForce GT 520M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 237 | 285 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 117 | 74 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 587 | 1326 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 415 | 536 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 415 | 536 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 646 | 1731 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 646 | 1731 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1468 | 2380 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1468 | 2380 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 3.237 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 83.376 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.26 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 5.92 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 4.992 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon HD 6410D IGP | NVIDIA GeForce GT 520M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Fermi |
Code name | WinterPark | GF108 |
Launch date | 20 June 2011 | 5 January 2011 |
Place in performance rating | 1561 | 1563 |
Type | Desktop | Laptop |
Launch price (MSRP) | $59.99 | |
Price now | $59.99 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 7.54 | |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 444 MHz | 672 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 142.08 gflops | 129.02 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 32 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 160 | 48 |
Texture fill rate | 3.55 GTexel / s | 5.9 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 12 Watt |
Transistor count | 1,180 million | 585 million |
CUDA cores | 48 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | IGP | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
API support |
||
DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
Memory type | System Shared | DDR3 |
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 12.8 GB / s | |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | |
Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
CUDA | ||
DirectCompute | ||
Optimus | ||
Verde Drivers |