Intel HD Graphics 620 vs AMD Radeon HD 8550 OEM
Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 620 and AMD Radeon HD 8550 OEM 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 620
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 10 month(s) later
- Around 62% higher texture fill rate: 25.2 GTexel / s vs 15.6 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 40 nm
- 4x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 60 Watt
- 32x more maximum memory size: 32 GB vs 1 GB
- Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1404 vs 1088
- Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1733 vs 1519
- Around 47% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3340 vs 2278
- Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1404 vs 1088
- Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1733 vs 1519
- Around 47% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3340 vs 2278
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 30 August 2016 vs 25 October 2013 |
| Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel / s vs 15.6 GTexel / s |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 60 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB vs 1 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1404 vs 1088 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1733 vs 1519 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3340 vs 2278 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1404 vs 1088 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1733 vs 1519 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3340 vs 2278 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 8550 OEM
- 2.2x more core clock speed: 650 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 20x more pipelines: 480 vs 24
- Around 55% better floating-point performance: 624.0 gflops vs 403.2 gflops
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Pipelines | 480 vs 24 |
| Floating-point performance | 624.0 gflops vs 403.2 gflops |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 620
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 8550 OEM
| 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 620 | AMD Radeon HD 8550 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 922 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 216 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 4178 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 24.275 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 227.879 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.508 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.582 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 30.288 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1404 | 1088 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1733 | 1519 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3340 | 2278 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1404 | 1088 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1733 | 1519 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3340 | 2278 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 343 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel HD Graphics 620 | AMD Radeon HD 8550 OEM | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.5 | TeraScale 2 |
| Code name | Kaby Lake GT2 | Turks |
| Launch date | 30 August 2016 | 25 October 2013 |
| Place in performance rating | 1334 | 1335 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 650 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 403.2 gflops | 624.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 24 | 480 |
| Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel / s | 15.6 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 60 Watt |
| Transistor count | 189 million | 716 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory type | DDR3L / LPDDR3 / LPDDR4 | GDDR3 |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB / s | |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare Intel HD Graphics 620 with others
IntelHD Graphics 620 vs
NVIDIAGeForce3 Ti500
IntelHD Graphics 620 vs
ATIMobility Radeon X1300
IntelHD Graphics 620 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 2400
IntelHD Graphics 620 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8570D
IntelHD Graphics 620 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8450G
IntelHD Graphics 620 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8550 OEM
