ATI Radeon HD 4200 vs HD Graphics 3000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 3000 with Radeon HD 4200, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 3000
2011
0.65
+124%

HD Graphics 3000 outperforms ATI HD 4200 by a whopping 124% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11991349
Place by popularity93not in top-100
ArchitectureGeneration 6.0 (2011)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameSandy Bridge GT2+RS880
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 February 2011 (14 years ago)1 August 2009 (15 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 cores9640
Core clock speed650 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speed1300 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,160 million181 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknownno data
Texture fill rate15.602.000
Floating-point processing power0.2496 TFLOPS0.04 TFLOPS
ROPs24
TMUs124

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 1.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP

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 SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.14.1
OpenGL3.13.3
OpenCLN/A1.0
VulkanN/AN/A

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.

HD Graphics 3000 0.65
+124%
ATI HD 4200 0.29

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
+129%
ATI HD 4200 111

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 3000 1568
+564%
ATI HD 4200 236

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
+125%
4−5
−125%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Valorant 27−30
+11.5%
24−27
−11.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 11
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 8
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+11.5%
24−27
−11.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 7
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+11.5%
24−27
−11.5%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

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

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how HD Graphics 3000 and ATI HD 4200 compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 3000 is 125% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the HD Graphics 3000 is 100% faster.
  • in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the ATI HD 4200 is 29% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 3000 is ahead in 15 tests (45%)
  • ATI HD 4200 is ahead in 3 tests (9%)
  • there's a draw in 15 tests (45%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.65 0.29
Recency 1 February 2011 1 August 2009
Chip lithography 32 nm 55 nm

HD Graphics 3000 has a 124.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 71.9% more advanced lithography process.

The HD Graphics 3000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4200 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 3000 is a notebook card while Radeon HD 4200 is a desktop 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.


Intel HD Graphics 3000
HD Graphics 3000
ATI Radeon HD 4200
Radeon HD 4200

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.


2.8 2537 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 275 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about HD Graphics 3000 or Radeon HD 4200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.