Intel HD Graphics 4000 vs AMD Radeon HD 6570

Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 4000 and AMD Radeon HD 6570 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 Intel HD Graphics 4000

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 3 month(s) later
• Around 62% higher boost clock speed: 1050 MHz vs 650 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 22 nm vs 40 nm
• 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 8.712 vs 4.278
• 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.931 vs 0.464
• Around 43% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1492 vs 1044
• Around 43% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1492 vs 1044

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 6570

• 3.7x more texture fill rate: 15.6 GTexel / s vs 4.2 GTexel / s
• 30x more pipelines: 480 vs 16
• 18.6x better floating-point performance: 624.0 gflops vs 33.6 gflops
• Around 13% lower typical power consumption: 40 Watt vs 45 Watt
• Around 61% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 559 vs 347
• Around 12% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 218 vs 194
• 2.9x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 1561 vs 538
• Around 64% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 255.525 vs 155.638
• Around 85% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 13.633 vs 7.36
• 4.9x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 59.183 vs 12.009
• Around 72% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1296 vs 754
• Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2716 vs 2392
• Around 72% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1296 vs 754
• Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2716 vs 2392

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 4000
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6570

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	347 559
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	194 218
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	538 1561
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8.712 4.278
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	155.638 255.525
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.931 0.464
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	7.36 13.633
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12.009 59.183
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	754 1296
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1492 1044
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2392 2716
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	754 1296
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1492 1044
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2392 2716

Compare specifications (specs)