Intel UHD Graphics 615 vs AMD Radeon HD 7540D IGP
Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 615 and AMD Radeon HD 7540D IGP 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel UHD Graphics 615
- Videocard is newer: launch date 6 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- 2763.2x more texture fill rate: 25.2 GTexel/s vs 9.12 GTexel / s
- Around 38% better floating-point performance: 403.2 gflops vs 291.8 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 32 nm
- 13x lower typical power consumption: 5 Watt vs 65 Watt
- 2.2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 740 vs 331
- Around 46% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 185 vs 127
- 3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3239 vs 1092
- Around 49% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1720 vs 1153
- Around 49% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1720 vs 1153
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 7 November 2018 vs 2 October 2012 |
Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel/s vs 9.12 GTexel / s |
Floating-point performance | 403.2 gflops vs 291.8 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 32 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt vs 65 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 740 vs 331 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 185 vs 127 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3239 vs 1092 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1720 vs 1153 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1720 vs 1153 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 7540D IGP
- 2.5x more core clock speed: 760 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 8x more pipelines: 192 vs 24
- Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2177 vs 1772
- Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2177 vs 1772
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 760 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Pipelines | 192 vs 24 |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2177 vs 1772 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2177 vs 1772 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 615
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 7540D IGP
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | Intel UHD Graphics 615 | AMD Radeon HD 7540D IGP |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 740 | 331 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 185 | 127 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3239 | 1092 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 18.583 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 221.42 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.34 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.269 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 23.383 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1256 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1720 | 1153 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1772 | 2177 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1256 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1720 | 1153 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1772 | 2177 |
Compare specifications (specs)
Intel UHD Graphics 615 | AMD Radeon HD 7540D IGP | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Generation 9.5 | TeraScale 3 |
Code name | Kaby Lake GT2 | Scrapper |
Launch date | 7 November 2018 | 2 October 2012 |
Place in performance rating | 1390 | 1397 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Launch price (MSRP) | $67 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 760 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 403.2 gflops | 291.8 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 32 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 100.8 GFLOPS | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 806.4 GFLOPS | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 403.2 GFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 24 | 192 |
Pixel fill rate | 3.150 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel/s | 9.12 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt | 65 Watt |
Transistor count | 189 million | 1,303 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | IGP |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 11.2 (11_0) |
OpenCL | 2.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | |
Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | |
Memory type | DDR3L / LPDDR3 | System Shared |
Shared memory | Yes | |
Technologies |
||
Quick Sync |