AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM vs Intel HD Graphics 4400
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM and Intel HD Graphics 4400 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, 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), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 month(s) later
- 2.1x more core clock speed: 730 MHz vs 350 MHz
- 3.4x more texture fill rate: 15.6 GTexel / s vs 4.6 GTexel / s
- 16x more pipelines: 320 vs 20
- 10.9x better floating-point performance: 499.2 gflops vs 46 gflops
- Around 4% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 545 vs 522
- 2.3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 4947 vs 2145
- Around 73% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 13.569 vs 7.844
- Around 5% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 162.886 vs 154.696
- Around 5% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.009 vs 0.958
- 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 19.668 vs 9.084
- 9.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 77.819 vs 8.335
- Around 37% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1119 vs 817
- Around 37% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1119 vs 817
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 1 November 2013 vs 3 September 2013 |
Core clock speed | 730 MHz vs 350 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 15.6 GTexel / s vs 4.6 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 320 vs 20 |
Floating-point performance | 499.2 gflops vs 46 gflops |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 545 vs 522 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 4947 vs 2145 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 13.569 vs 7.844 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 162.886 vs 154.696 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.009 vs 0.958 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 19.668 vs 9.084 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 77.819 vs 8.335 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1119 vs 817 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1119 vs 817 |
Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 4400
- Around 47% higher boost clock speed: 1150 MHz vs 780 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 22 nm vs 28 nm
- 2.5x lower typical power consumption: 20 Watt vs 50 Watt
- Around 44% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 277 vs 193
- Around 8% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1381 vs 1284
- Around 34% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3044 vs 2264
- Around 8% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1381 vs 1284
- Around 34% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3044 vs 2264
Specifications (specs) | |
Boost clock speed | 1150 MHz vs 780 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 20 Watt vs 50 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 277 vs 193 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1381 vs 1284 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3044 vs 2264 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1381 vs 1284 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3044 vs 2264 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4400
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
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) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM | Intel HD Graphics 4400 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 545 | 522 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 193 | 277 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 4947 | 2145 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 13.569 | 7.844 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 162.886 | 154.696 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.009 | 0.958 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 19.668 | 9.084 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 77.819 | 8.335 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1119 | 817 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1284 | 1381 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2264 | 3044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1119 | 817 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1284 | 1381 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2264 | 3044 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 152 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM | Intel HD Graphics 4400 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Generation 7.5 |
Code name | Oland | Haswell GT2 |
Launch date | 1 November 2013 | 3 September 2013 |
Place in performance rating | 1414 | 1415 |
Type | Desktop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 780 MHz | 1150 MHz |
Core clock speed | 730 MHz | 350 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 499.2 gflops | 46 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 22 nm |
Pipelines | 320 | 20 |
Texture fill rate | 15.6 GTexel / s | 4.6 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 20 Watt |
Transistor count | 1,040 million | 392 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
Length | 168 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_1) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.3 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 28.8 GB / s | |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 / 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | |
Memory type | DDR3 | |
Shared memory | 1 | |
Technologies |
||
Quick Sync |