Intel HD Graphics 4400 versus Intel HD Graphics 4000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel HD Graphics 4400 and Intel HD Graphics 4000 pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire, Technologies. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: 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.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le Intel HD Graphics 4400
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 3 mois plus tard
- Environ 10% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1150 MHz versus 1050 MHz
- Environ 10% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 4.6 GTexel / s versus 4.2 GTexel / s
- Environ 25% de pipelines plus haut: 20 versus 16
- Environ 37% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 46 gflops versus 33.6 gflops
- 2.3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 20 Watt versus 45 Watt
- Environ 51% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 524 versus 347
- Environ 42% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 275 versus 194
- 4x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 2143 versus 538
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.958 versus 0.931
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 9.084 versus 7.36
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 817 versus 754
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3044 versus 2392
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 817 versus 754
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3044 versus 2392
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 3 September 2013 versus 14 May 2012 |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1150 MHz versus 1050 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 4.6 GTexel / s versus 4.2 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 20 versus 16 |
| Performance á point flottant | 46 gflops versus 33.6 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 20 Watt versus 45 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 524 versus 347 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 275 versus 194 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 2143 versus 538 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.958 versus 0.931 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 9.084 versus 7.36 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 817 versus 754 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3044 versus 2392 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 817 versus 754 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3044 versus 2392 |
Raisons pour considerer le Intel HD Graphics 4000
- Environ 86% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 650 MHz versus 350 MHz
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 8.712 versus 7.844
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 155.638 versus 154.696
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 12.009 versus 8.335
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1492 versus 1381
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1492 versus 1381
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 650 MHz versus 350 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.712 versus 7.844 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 155.638 versus 154.696 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 12.009 versus 8.335 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1492 versus 1381 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1492 versus 1381 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 4400
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4000
| 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) |
|
|
| Nom | Intel HD Graphics 4400 | Intel HD Graphics 4000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 524 | 347 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 275 | 194 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 2143 | 538 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 7.844 | 8.712 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 154.696 | 155.638 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.958 | 0.931 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 9.084 | 7.36 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 8.335 | 12.009 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 817 | 754 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1381 | 1492 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3044 | 2392 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 817 | 754 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1381 | 1492 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3044 | 2392 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 152 | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| Intel HD Graphics 4400 | Intel HD Graphics 4000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Generation 7.5 | Generation 7.0 |
| Nom de code | Haswell GT2 | Ivy Bridge GT2 |
| Date de sortie | 3 September 2013 | 14 May 2012 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1421 | 1501 |
| Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1150 MHz | 1050 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 350 MHz | 650 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 46 gflops | 33.6 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 22 nm | 22 nm |
| Pipelines | 20 | 16 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 4.6 GTexel / s | 4.2 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 20 Watt | 45 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 392 million | 1,200 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 11.1 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.0 |
Mémoire |
||
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 / 128 Bit | 64 / 128 Bit |
| Mémoire partagé | 1 | 1 |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer Intel HD Graphics 4400 avec des autres
IntelHD Graphics 4400 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 555M
IntelHD Graphics 4400 vs
AMDRadeon HD 7560D
IntelHD Graphics 4400 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8350G
IntelHD Graphics 4400 vs
AMDFirePro S4000X
IntelHD Graphics 4400 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K620M
IntelHD Graphics 4400 vs
NVIDIAGRID M40
