HD Graphics 4600 vs GeForce GTX 280

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 280 with HD Graphics 4600, including specs and performance data.

GTX 280
2008
1 GB GDDR3, 236 Watt
3.34
+81.5%

GTX 280 outperforms HD Graphics 4600 by an impressive 82% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking746924
Place by popularitynot in top-10058
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.12no data
Power efficiency0.976.33
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Generation 7.5 (2013)
GPU code nameGT200Haswell GT2
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date16 June 2008 (16 years ago)27 May 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores240160
Core clock speed602 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1100 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million392 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm22 nm
Power consumption (TDP)236 Watt45 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate48.1622.00
Floating-point processing power0.6221 TFLOPS0.352 TFLOPS
ROPs322
TMUs8020

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16Ring Bus
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width512 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1107 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth141.7 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsHDTVDual Link DVIPortable Device Dependent
Multi monitor support+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL2.14.3
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A+
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.

GTX 280 3.34
+81.5%
HD Graphics 4600 1.84

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 280 1285
+81%
HD Graphics 4600 710

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:

900p24−27
+71.4%
14
−71.4%
Full HD18−20
+63.6%
11
−63.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p36.06no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Fortnite 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27
+0%
27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 22
+0%
22
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4
+0%
4
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
+0%
4
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how GTX 280 and HD Graphics 4600 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 280 is 71% faster in 900p
  • GTX 280 is 64% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 56 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.34 1.84
Recency 16 June 2008 27 May 2013
Chip lithography 65 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 236 Watt 45 Watt

GTX 280 has a 81.5% higher aggregate performance score.

HD Graphics 4600, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 195.5% more advanced lithography process, and 424.4% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 280 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 4600 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 280 is a desktop card while HD Graphics 4600 is a notebook one.

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 GTX 280
GeForce GTX 280
Intel HD Graphics 4600
HD Graphics 4600

Other comparisons

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.


3.6 109 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 280 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 2590 votes

Rate HD Graphics 4600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 280 or HD Graphics 4600, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.