Intel HD Graphics 500 vs Intel HD Graphics 4400

Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 500 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 Intel HD Graphics 500

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 11 month(s) later
• Around 96% higher texture fill rate: 9 GTexel / s vs 4.6 GTexel / s
• 3.1x better floating-point performance: 144.0 gflops vs 46 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 22 nm
• 3.3x lower typical power consumption: 6 Watt vs 20 Watt

Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 4400

• Around 75% higher core clock speed: 350 MHz vs 200 MHz
• Around 53% higher boost clock speed: 1150 MHz vs 750 MHz
• Around 67% higher pipelines: 20 vs 12
• Around 75% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 524 vs 300
• 3.4x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 275 vs 80
• 2.4x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 2143 vs 911
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 7.844 vs 3.525
• 4.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 154.696 vs 35.665
• 4.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.958 vs 0.215
• 3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 9.084 vs 2.987
• 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 8.335 vs 4.154
• Around 67% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 817 vs 488
• 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1381 vs 579
• 2.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3044 vs 1122
• Around 67% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 817 vs 488
• 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1381 vs 579
• 2.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3044 vs 1122

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 500
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4400

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	300 524
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	80 275
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	911 2143
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.525 7.844
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	35.665 154.696
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.215 0.958
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.987 9.084
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4.154 8.335
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	488 817
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	579 1381
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1122 3044
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	488 817
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	579 1381
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1122 3044

Compare specifications (specs)