Radeon R5 M330 vs HD Graphics 2000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 2000 with Radeon R5 M330, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 2000
2011
0.55

R5 M330 outperforms HD Graphics 2000 by a whopping 180% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1209965
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data5.92
ArchitectureGeneration 6.0 (2011)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameSandy Bridge GT1Exo
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 February 2011 (13 years ago)5 May 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 cores48320
Compute unitsno data5
Core clock speed850 MHz955 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHz1030 MHz
Number of transistors189 million690 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown18 Watt
Texture fill rate8.10020.60
Floating-point processing power0.1296 TFLOPS0.6592 TFLOPS
ROPs18
TMUs620

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).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
WidthIGPno data
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 SharedDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data14.4 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 outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

HD3D-+
PowerTune-+
DualGraphics-+
ZeroCore-+
Switchable graphics-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)DirectX® 12
Shader Model4.15.0
OpenGL3.14.4
OpenCLN/ANot Listed
VulkanN/A+
Mantle-+

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
R5 M330 1.54
+180%

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
R5 M330 595
+179%

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
+22.2%
9
−22.2%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Hitman 3 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−87.5%
14−16
+87.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−21.4%
30−35
+21.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Hitman 3 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−87.5%
14−16
+87.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−44.4%
13
+44.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−21.4%
30−35
+21.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Hitman 3 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−87.5%
14−16
+87.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−21.4%
30−35
+21.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 1−2
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

This is how HD Graphics 2000 and R5 M330 compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 2000 is 22% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the R5 M330 is 150% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R5 M330 is ahead in 28 tests (60%)
  • there's a draw in 19 tests (40%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.55 1.54
Recency 1 February 2011 5 May 2015
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm

R5 M330 has a 180% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R5 M330 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 2000 is a desktop card while Radeon R5 M330 is a notebook one.


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
AMD Radeon R5 M330
Radeon R5 M330

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 1268 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 1003 votes

Rate Radeon R5 M330 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.