Intel HD Graphics 520 vs Intel HD Graphics 4000

Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 520 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 520

• Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 3 month(s) later
• Around 50% higher pipelines: 24 vs 16
• 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
• 2.5x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 864 vs 347
• Around 8% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 209 vs 194
• 7.4x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3993 vs 538
• 2.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 21.852 vs 8.712
• Around 34% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.243 vs 0.931
• Around 76% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 12.958 vs 7.36
• 2.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 28.182 vs 12.009
• Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 951 vs 754
• Around 40% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3337 vs 2392
• Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 951 vs 754
• Around 40% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3337 vs 2392

Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 4000

• 2.2x more core clock speed: 650 MHz vs 300 MHz
• Around 9% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 155.638 vs 143.083
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1492 vs 1462
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1492 vs 1462

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 520
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	864 347
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	209 194
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	3993 538
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	21.852 8.712
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	143.083 155.638
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.243 0.931
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12.958 7.36
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	28.182 12.009
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	951 754
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1462 1492
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3337 2392
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	951 754
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1462 1492
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3337 2392

Compare specifications (specs)