Quadro T500 Mobile vs HD Graphics 3000
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics 3000 with Quadro T500 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
T500 Mobile outperforms HD Graphics 3000 by a whopping 1268% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1199 | 494 |
| Place by popularity | 93 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 34.39 |
| Architecture | Generation 6.0 (2011) | Turing (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | Sandy Bridge GT2+ | TU117 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 1 February 2011 (14 years ago) | 2 December 2020 (4 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 cores | 96 | 896 |
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz | 1365 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1300 MHz | 1695 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,160 million | 4,700 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 32 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | unknown | 18 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 15.60 | 94.92 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.2496 TFLOPS | 3.037 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 2 | 32 |
| TMUs | 12 | 56 |
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 size | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
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 type | System Shared | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 1250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 80 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 Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 3.1 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2 |
| CUDA | - | 7.5 |
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.
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.
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 HD | 9
−300%
| 36
+300%
|
| 1440p | 1−2
−1400%
| 15
+1400%
|
| 4K | 1−2
−1600%
| 17
+1600%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−1250%
|
27−30
+1250%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−1257%
|
95−100
+1257%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−1250%
|
27−30
+1250%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−1250%
|
27−30
+1250%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−1257%
|
95−100
+1257%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−1250%
|
27−30
+1250%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−825%
|
35−40
+825%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−193%
|
85−90
+193%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−1250%
|
27−30
+1250%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−1257%
|
95−100
+1257%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 11
−1100%
|
130−140
+1100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−1250%
|
27−30
+1250%
|
| Dota 2 | 8
−1025%
|
90
+1025%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−825%
|
35−40
+825%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 16−18 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−460%
|
28
+460%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−193%
|
85−90
+193%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−1257%
|
95−100
+1257%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−1250%
|
27−30
+1250%
|
| Dota 2 | 7
−971%
|
75
+971%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−825%
|
35−40
+825%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−280%
|
19
+280%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−1107%
|
350−400
+1107%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 2−3
−3150%
|
65−70
+3150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−1233%
|
40−45
+1233%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−1900%
|
20−22
+1900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−1100%
|
12−14
+1100%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2
−1600%
|
16−18
+1600%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14
−7.1%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−1000%
|
40−45
+1000%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−800%
|
9−10
+800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30
+0%
|
30
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 28
+0%
|
28
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 31
+0%
|
31
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27
+0%
|
27
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 13
+0%
|
13
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 28
+0%
|
28
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
This is how HD Graphics 3000 and T500 Mobile compete in popular games:
- T500 Mobile is 300% faster in 1080p
- T500 Mobile is 1400% faster in 1440p
- T500 Mobile is 1600% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Grand Theft Auto V, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the HD Graphics 3000 is 7% faster.
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the T500 Mobile is 3150% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD Graphics 3000 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
- T500 Mobile is ahead in 20 tests (45%)
- there's a draw in 23 tests (52%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.66 | 9.03 |
| Recency | 1 February 2011 | 2 December 2020 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 12 nm |
T500 Mobile has a 1268.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 166.7% more advanced lithography process.
The Quadro T500 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 3000 in performance tests.
Be aware that HD Graphics 3000 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro T500 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
