Intel HD Graphics 610 vs Intel HD Graphics 4400
Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 610 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, 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, 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 610
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- 5.7x more texture fill rate: 26.4 GTexel / s vs 4.6 GTexel / s
- 9.2x better floating-point performance: 422.4 gflops vs 46 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 22 nm
- 4x lower typical power consumption: 5 Watt vs 20 Watt
- Around 32% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 693 vs 524
- Around 14% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 2443 vs 2143
- Around 24% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1017 vs 817
- Around 24% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1017 vs 817
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 30 August 2016 vs 3 September 2013 |
Texture fill rate | 26.4 GTexel / s vs 4.6 GTexel / s |
Floating-point performance | 422.4 gflops vs 46 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 22 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt vs 20 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 693 vs 524 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2443 vs 2143 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1017 vs 817 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1017 vs 817 |
Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 4400
- Around 17% higher core clock speed: 350 MHz vs 300 MHz
- Around 5% higher boost clock speed: 1150 MHz vs 1100 MHz
- Around 67% higher pipelines: 20 vs 12
- Around 77% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 275 vs 155
- 3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1381 vs 464
- 3.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3044 vs 845
- 3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1381 vs 464
- 3.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3044 vs 845
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 350 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1150 MHz vs 1100 MHz |
Pipelines | 20 vs 12 |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 275 vs 155 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1381 vs 464 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3044 vs 845 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1381 vs 464 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3044 vs 845 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 610
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4400
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
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) |
|
|
Name | Intel HD Graphics 610 | Intel HD Graphics 4400 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 693 | 524 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 155 | 275 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2443 | 2143 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1017 | 817 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 464 | 1381 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 845 | 3044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1017 | 817 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 464 | 1381 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 845 | 3044 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 152 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 7.844 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 154.696 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.958 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 9.084 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 8.335 |
Compare specifications (specs)
Intel HD Graphics 610 | Intel HD Graphics 4400 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Generation 9.5 | Generation 7.5 |
Code name | Kaby Lake GT1 | Haswell GT2 |
Launch date | 30 August 2016 | 3 September 2013 |
Place in performance rating | 1531 | 1421 |
Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | 1150 MHz |
Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 350 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 422.4 gflops | 46 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 22 nm |
Pipelines | 12 | 20 |
Texture fill rate | 26.4 GTexel / s | 4.6 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt | 20 Watt |
Transistor count | 189 million | 392 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_1) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.3 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 32 GB | |
Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 64 / 128 Bit |
Memory type | DDR3L / LPDDR3 / DDR4 | |
Shared memory | 1 | 1 |
Technologies |
||
Quick Sync |