Intel UHD Graphics 600 vs AMD Radeon HD 8250
Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 600 and AMD Radeon HD 8250 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 UHD Graphics 600
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- Around 88% higher boost clock speed: 750 MHz vs 400 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- Around 51% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 320 vs 212
- Around 58% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 93 vs 59
- Around 24% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 476 vs 384
- Around 59% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1000 vs 628
- Around 27% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1701 vs 1343
- Around 24% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 476 vs 384
- Around 59% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1000 vs 628
- Around 27% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1701 vs 1343
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 11 December 2017 vs 1 June 2013 |
Boost clock speed | 750 MHz vs 400 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 320 vs 212 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 93 vs 59 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 476 vs 384 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1000 vs 628 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1701 vs 1343 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 476 vs 384 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1000 vs 628 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1701 vs 1343 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 8250
- Around 50% higher core clock speed: 300 MHz vs 200 MHz
- 10.7x more pipelines: 128 vs 12
- Around 8% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 1075 vs 995
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 300 MHz vs 200 MHz |
Pipelines | 128 vs 12 |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 1075 vs 995 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 600
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 8250
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 UHD Graphics 600 | AMD Radeon HD 8250 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 320 | 212 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 93 | 59 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 995 | 1075 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 7.529 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 75.815 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.495 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 8.178 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 11.584 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 476 | 384 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1000 | 628 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1701 | 1343 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 476 | 384 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1000 | 628 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1701 | 1343 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
Intel UHD Graphics 600 | AMD Radeon HD 8250 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Generation 9.5 | GCN |
Code name | Gemini Lake GT1 | Temash |
Launch date | 11 December 2017 | 1 June 2013 |
Place in performance rating | 1617 | 1620 |
Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 750 MHz | 400 MHz |
Core clock speed | 200 MHz | 300 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 12 | 128 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt | |
Transistor count | 189 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 11.1 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | |
Memory |
||
Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | |
Memory type | DDR4 / LPDDR4 | |
Shared memory | 1 | 1 |
Technologies |
||
Quick Sync |