Quadro K420 vs HD Graphics 3000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 3000 with Quadro K420, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 3000
2011
0.66

K420 outperforms HD Graphics 3000 by a whopping 191% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1185904
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.08
Power efficiencyno data3.27
ArchitectureGeneration 6.0 (2011)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameSandy Bridge GT2+GK107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 February 2011 (13 years ago)22 July 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$96.67

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 cores96192
Core clock speed650 MHz876 MHz
Boost clock speed1300 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,160 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown41 Watt
Texture fill rate15.6014.02
Floating-point processing power0.2496 TFLOPS0.3364 TFLOPS
ROPs216
TMUs1216

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).

InterfaceRing BusPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data160 mm
Widthno data1" (2.5 cm)
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 Shared128 Bit
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared1 GB/2 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared891 MHz
Memory bandwidthno dataUp to 29 GB/s
Shared memory+no data

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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displaysno data4

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Desktop Managementno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12
Shader Model4.15.1
OpenGL3.14.5
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA-3.0

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 3000 0.66
Quadro K420 1.92
+191%

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 3000 254
Quadro K420 742
+192%

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 HD9
−167%
24−27
+167%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.03

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Hitman 3 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−173%
30−33
+173%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−167%
16−18
+167%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−183%
85−90
+183%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Hitman 3 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−173%
30−33
+173%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−167%
16−18
+167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−170%
27−30
+170%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−183%
85−90
+183%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Hitman 3 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−173%
30−33
+173%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−167%
16−18
+167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−170%
27−30
+170%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−183%
85−90
+183%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Hitman 3 6−7
−167%
16−18
+167%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%

This is how HD Graphics 3000 and Quadro K420 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro K420 is 167% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.66 1.92
Recency 1 February 2011 22 July 2014
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm

Quadro K420 has a 190.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro K420 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 3000 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 3000 is a notebook card while Quadro K420 is a workstation 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 3000
HD Graphics 3000
NVIDIA Quadro K420
Quadro K420

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.


2.8 2399 votes

Rate HD Graphics 3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 142 votes

Rate Quadro K420 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.