Radeon R5 M255 vs HD Graphics 3000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 3000 and Radeon R5 M255, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics 3000
2011
0.66

R5 M255 outperforms HD Graphics 3000 by a whopping 114% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11871005
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGeneration 6.0 (2011)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameSandy Bridge GT2+Topaz
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 February 2011 (13 years ago)12 October 2014 (10 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 cores96384
Compute unitsno data5
Core clock speed650 MHz925 MHz
Boost clock speed1300 MHz940 MHz
Number of transistors1,160 million1,550 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknownno data
Texture fill rate15.6022.56
Floating-point processing power0.2496 TFLOPS0.7219 TFLOPS
ROPs28
TMUs1224

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 x8
InterfaceRing BusPCIe 3.0 x8

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 data16 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs
Eyefinity-+

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration-+
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® 11
Shader Model4.16.3
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 3000 0.66
R5 M255 1.41
+114%

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
R5 M255 542
+113%

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
R5 M255 5399
+244%

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.

HD Graphics 3000 2503
R5 M255 6053
+142%

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:

900p9−10
−133%
21
+133%
Full HD8
−62.5%
13
+62.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−100%
6
+100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−36.4%
14−16
+36.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−100%
12
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−10%
30−35
+10%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−36.4%
14−16
+36.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−33.3%
8
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−110%
21
+110%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−10%
30−35
+10%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+120%
5
−120%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−33.3%
8
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+233%
3
−233%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−10%
30−35
+10%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 1−2
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

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%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9
+0%
9
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

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

Full HD
Ultra Preset

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

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+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 3000 and R5 M255 compete in popular games:

  • R5 M255 is 133% faster in 900p
  • R5 M255 is 63% faster in 1080p

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD Graphics 3000 is 233% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R5 M255 is 250% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 3000 is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
  • R5 M255 is ahead in 29 tests (62%)
  • there's a draw in 16 tests (34%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.66 1.41
Recency 1 February 2011 12 October 2014
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm

R5 M255 has a 113.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R5 M255 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 3000 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 3000
HD Graphics 3000
AMD Radeon R5 M255
Radeon R5 M255

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 2438 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 65 votes

Rate Radeon R5 M255 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.