AMD Radeon R7 M265 vs Intel HD Graphics 4000

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R7 M265 and Intel HD Graphics 4000 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 R7 M265

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 0 month(s) later
• Around 38% higher core clock speed: 900 MHz vs 650 MHz
• 4.7x more texture fill rate: 19.8 GTexel / s vs 4.2 GTexel / s
• 24x more pipelines: 384 vs 16
• 18.9x better floating-point performance: 633.6 gflops vs 33.6 gflops
• Around 54% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 536 vs 347
• 10.4x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5587 vs 538
• Around 38% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 12.031 vs 8.712
• Around 81% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 282.111 vs 155.638
• Around 56% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.455 vs 0.931
• 2.9x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 21.704 vs 7.36
• 5.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 68.392 vs 12.009
• 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1551 vs 754
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2424 vs 2392
• 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1551 vs 754
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2424 vs 2392

Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 4000

• Around 27% higher boost clock speed: 1050 MHz vs 825 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 22 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 45% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 194 vs 134
• Around 18% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1492 vs 1264
• Around 18% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1492 vs 1264

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 M265
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	536 347
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	134 194
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	5587 538
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12.031 8.712
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	282.111 155.638
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.455 0.931
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	21.704 7.36
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	68.392 12.009
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1551 754
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1264 1492
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2424 2392
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1551 754
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1264 1492
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2424 2392

Compare specifications (specs)