Intel HD Graphics 510 vs Intel HD Graphics 4000

Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 510 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 Intel HD Graphics 510

• Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 3 month(s) later
• 2.7x more texture fill rate: 11.4 GTexel / s vs 4.2 GTexel / s
• 5.4x better floating-point performance: 182.4 gflops vs 33.6 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 22 nm
• 3x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 45 Watt
• Around 81% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 625 vs 345
• 4.6x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 2471 vs 538
• Around 65% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 14.381 vs 8.712
• Around 39% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 215.873 vs 155.638
• Around 16% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.081 vs 0.931
• Around 59% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 11.675 vs 7.36
• Around 26% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 15.094 vs 12.009
• Around 20% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 902 vs 754
• Around 20% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 902 vs 754

Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 4000

• 2.2x more core clock speed: 650 MHz vs 300 MHz
• Around 11% higher boost clock speed: 1050 MHz vs 950 MHz
• Around 33% higher pipelines: 16 vs 12
• Around 18% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 191 vs 162
• Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1492 vs 1333
• Around 34% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2392 vs 1786
• Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1492 vs 1333
• Around 34% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2392 vs 1786

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 510
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	625 345
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	162 191
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	2471 538
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	14.381 8.712
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	215.873 155.638
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.081 0.931
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	11.675 7.36
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	15.094 12.009
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	902 754
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1333 1492
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1786 2392
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	902 754
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1333 1492
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1786 2392

Compare specifications (specs)