AMD Radeon R7 240 vs Intel HD Graphics 4000

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R7 240 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 AMD Radeon R7 240

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 4 month(s) later
• 3.7x more texture fill rate: 15.6 GTexel / s vs 4.2 GTexel / s
• 20x more pipelines: 320 vs 16
• 14.9x better floating-point performance: 499.2 gflops vs 33.6 gflops
• 2.6x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 902 vs 347
• Around 41% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 274 vs 194
• 9.9x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5331 vs 538
• Around 53% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 13.344 vs 8.712
• Around 87% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 290.632 vs 155.638
• Around 36% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.262 vs 0.931
• 2.9x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 21.59 vs 7.36
• 5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 60.326 vs 12.009
• 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1688 vs 754
• Around 57% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2342 vs 1492
• Around 40% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 vs 2392
• 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1688 vs 754
• Around 57% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2342 vs 1492
• Around 40% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 vs 2392

Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 4000

• Around 35% higher boost clock speed: 1050 MHz vs 780 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 22 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 11% lower typical power consumption: 45 Watt vs 50 Watt

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 240
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	902 347
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	274 194
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	5331 538
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	13.344 8.712
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	290.632 155.638
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.262 0.931
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	21.59 7.36
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	60.326 12.009
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1688 754
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2342 1492
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3353 2392
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1688 754
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2342 1492
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3353 2392

Compare specifications (specs)