HD Graphics 520 vs GeForce GT 750M SLI

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 750M SLI and HD Graphics 520, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 750M SLI
2013
2x 2 GB DDR3, GDDR5
6.90
+221%

GT 750M SLI outperforms HD Graphics 520 by a whopping 221% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking555862
Place by popularitynot in top-10043
Power efficiencyno data9.99
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)
GPU code nameN14P-GTSkylake GT2
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 April 2013 (11 years ago)1 September 2015 (9 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores768192
Core clock speed967 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data900 MHz
Number of transistors1300 Million189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm+
Power consumption (TDP)no data15 Watt
Texture fill rateno data21.60
Floating-point processing powerno data0.3456 TFLOPS
ROPsno data3
TMUsno data24

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataRing Bus

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDR3, GDDR5DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amount2x 2 GB32 GB
Memory bus width2x 128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed2000 - 5000 MHzSystem Shared
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectorsno dataPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX1112 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-+
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GT 750M SLI 6.90
+221%
HD Graphics 520 2.15

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GT 750M SLI 4634
+258%
HD Graphics 520 1294

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 750M SLI 16142
+182%
HD Graphics 520 5722

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GT 750M SLI 3703
+361%
HD Graphics 520 804

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GT 750M SLI 23491
+251%
HD Graphics 520 6701

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p60−65
+200%
20
−200%
Full HD54
+440%
10
−440%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+143%
7−8
−143%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Battlefield 5 20−22
+900%
2−3
−900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+200%
5
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+400%
9−10
−400%
Hitman 3 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+128%
18−20
−128%
Metro Exodus 18−20 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+280%
5−6
−280%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+47.2%
35−40
−47.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+143%
7−8
−143%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Battlefield 5 20−22
+900%
2−3
−900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+400%
9−10
−400%
Hitman 3 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+128%
18−20
−128%
Metro Exodus 18−20 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+280%
5−6
−280%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+61.5%
13
−61.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+47.2%
35−40
−47.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+143%
7−8
−143%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+400%
9−10
−400%
Hitman 3 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+128%
18−20
−128%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+61.5%
12−14
−61.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+47.2%
35−40
−47.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+280%
5−6
−280%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+243%
7−8
−243%
Hitman 3 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+150%
6−7
−150%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+267%
12−14
−267%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Hitman 3 3−4 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+250%
6−7
−250%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%

This is how GT 750M SLI and HD Graphics 520 compete in popular games:

  • GT 750M SLI is 200% faster in 900p
  • GT 750M SLI is 440% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GT 750M SLI is 900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GT 750M SLI surpassed HD Graphics 520 in all 54 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.90 2.15
Recency 1 April 2013 1 September 2015
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm

GT 750M SLI has a 220.9% higher aggregate performance score.

HD Graphics 520, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GT 750M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 520 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M SLI
GeForce GT 750M SLI
Intel HD Graphics 520
HD Graphics 520

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.4 14 votes

Rate GeForce GT 750M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 3036 votes

Rate HD Graphics 520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.