Intel HD Graphics 620 vs Intel HD Graphics 4000

Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 620 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 620

• Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 3 month(s) later
• 6x more texture fill rate: 25.2 GTexel / s vs 4.2 GTexel / s
• Around 50% higher pipelines: 24 vs 16
• 12x better floating-point performance: 403.2 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
• 2.7x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 922 vs 347
• Around 11% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 216 vs 194
• 7.8x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 4178 vs 538
• 2.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 24.275 vs 8.712
• Around 46% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 227.879 vs 155.638
• Around 62% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.508 vs 0.931
• 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 15.582 vs 7.36
• 2.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 30.288 vs 12.009
• Around 86% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1404 vs 754
• Around 16% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1733 vs 1492
• Around 40% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3340 vs 2392
• Around 86% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1404 vs 754
• Around 16% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1733 vs 1492
• Around 40% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3340 vs 2392

Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 4000

• 2.2x more core clock speed: 650 MHz vs 300 MHz

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 620
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	922 347
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	216 194
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	4178 538
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	24.275 8.712
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	227.879 155.638
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.508 0.931
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	15.582 7.36
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	30.288 12.009
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1404 754
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1733 1492
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3340 2392
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1404 754
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1733 1492
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3340 2392

Compare specifications (specs)