UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) vs HD Graphics 3000

Place in the ranking	1180	884
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	no data	13.85
Architecture	Generation 6.0 (2011)	Gen. 11 (2021)
GPU code name	Sandy Bridge GT2+	Gen. 11
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	1 February 2011 (13 years ago)	11 January 2021 (3 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	32
Core clock speed	650 MHz	350 MHz
Boost clock speed	1300 MHz	900 MHz
Number of transistors	1,160 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	32 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	unknown	4.8 - 10 Watt
Texture fill rate	15.60	no data
Floating-point processing power	0.2496 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	2	no data
TMUs	12	no data

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).

Interface	Ring Bus	no data
Width	IGP	no data

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	no data
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	no data
Memory bus width	System Shared	no data
Memory clock speed	System Shared	no data
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 data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12_1
Shader Model	4.1	no data
OpenGL	3.1	no data
OpenCL	N/A	no data
Vulkan	N/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. 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

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) 2.00
+203%

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

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) 6317
+303%

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

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) 6977
+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 HD

+0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−33.3%

4−5
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −400%	5−6 +400%
Hitman 3	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −54.5%	16−18 +54.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −16.7%	35−40 +16.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −400%	5−6 +400%
Hitman 3	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −54.5%	16−18 +54.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −50%	9 +50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −20%	12−14 +20%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −16.7%	35−40 +16.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Hitman 3	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 +83.3%	6 −83.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −117%	13 +117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +233%	3 −233%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −16.7%	35−40 +16.7%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

−200%

3−4
+200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	2−3
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Hitman 3	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 −450%	10−12 +450%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−66.7%

5−6
+66.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

+0%

4−5

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5

3−4

+0%

3−4

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
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	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

This is how HD Graphics 3000 and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) compete in popular games:

A tie 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 UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is 450% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

HD Graphics 3000 is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is ahead in 32 tests (63%)
there's a draw in 17 tests (33%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.66	2.00
Recency	1 February 2011	11 January 2021
Chip lithography	32 nm	10 nm

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) has a 203% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 220% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 3000 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 3000 is a desktop card while UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.