Arc A750 vs HD Graphics 2000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 2000 and Arc A750, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics 2000
2011
0.55

Arc A750 outperforms HD Graphics 2000 by a whopping 5529% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1208175
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data54.98
Power efficiencyno data9.93
ArchitectureGeneration 6.0 (2011)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameSandy Bridge GT1DG2-512
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 February 2011 (13 years ago)12 October 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$289

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores483584
Core clock speed850 MHz2050 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHz2400 MHz
Number of transistors189 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown225 Watt
Texture fill rate8.100537.6
Floating-point processing power0.1296 TFLOPS17.2 TFLOPS
ROPs1112
TMUs6224
Tensor Coresno data448
Ray Tracing Coresno data28

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 1.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data512.0 GB/s
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 outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.6
OpenGL3.14.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3

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.

HD Graphics 2000 0.55
Arc A750 30.96
+5529%

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.

HD Graphics 2000 213
Arc A750 11945
+5508%

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.

HD Graphics 2000 896
Arc A750 98837
+10937%

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:

Full HD11
−909%
111
+909%
1440p1−2
−6200%
63
+6200%
4K0−136

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−5400%
110−120
+5400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1967%
62
+1967%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−4300%
85−90
+4300%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−5400%
110−120
+5400%
Hitman 3 4−5
−2250%
90−95
+2250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−2125%
170−180
+2125%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−4025%
160−170
+4025%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−382%
130−140
+382%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−3433%
106
+3433%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−4300%
85−90
+4300%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−5400%
110−120
+5400%
Hitman 3 4−5
−2250%
90−95
+2250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−2125%
170−180
+2125%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−5875%
239
+5875%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−911%
90−95
+911%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−382%
130−140
+382%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1400%
45
+1400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−4300%
85−90
+4300%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−5400%
110−120
+5400%
Hitman 3 4−5
−2250%
90−95
+2250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1313%
113
+1313%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−4875%
199
+4875%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−667%
69
+667%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−125%
63
+125%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 6−7
−867%
55−60
+867%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−4500%
92
+4500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3700%
75−80
+3700%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−2700%
28
+2700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 30

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−1900%
40−45
+1900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90
+0%
90
+0%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Metro Exodus 144
+0%
144
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 76
+0%
76
+0%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Metro Exodus 143
+0%
143
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 69
+0%
69
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90
+0%
90
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 38
+0%
38
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 54
+0%
54
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Metro Exodus 86
+0%
86
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 145
+0%
145
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 57
+0%
57
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hitman 3 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Metro Exodus 80
+0%
80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69
+0%
69
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 61
+0%
61
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 84
+0%
84
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30
+0%
30
+0%

This is how HD Graphics 2000 and Arc A750 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A750 is 909% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A750 is 6200% faster in 1440p

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

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A750 is 5875% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc A750 is ahead in 25 tests (38%)
  • there's a draw in 40 tests (62%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.55 30.96
Recency 1 February 2011 12 October 2022
Chip lithography 32 nm 6 nm

Arc A750 has a 5529.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 433.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A750 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 2000 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.


Intel HD Graphics 2000
HD Graphics 2000
Intel Arc A750
Arc A750

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.


2.7 1264 votes

Rate HD Graphics 2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 788 votes

Rate Arc A750 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.