GeForce G 105M vs HD Graphics 4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 4000 and GeForce G 105M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics 4000
2012
1.18
+638%

HD Graphics 4000 outperforms G 105M by a whopping 638% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10661416
Place by popularity50not in top-100
Power efficiency1.800.78
ArchitectureGeneration 7.0 (2012−2013)G9x (2007−2010)
GPU code nameIvy Bridge GT2N10M-GE1
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date14 May 2012 (12 years ago)8 January 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 cores1288
Core clock speed650 MHz640 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology22 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown14 Watt
Texture fill rate16.00no data
Floating-point processing power0.256 TFLOPSno data
ROPs2no data
TMUs16no 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).

InterfaceRing Busno 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR2, GDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared512 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared700 MHz
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 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.

DirectX11.1 (11_0)10
Shader Model5.0no data
OpenGL4.0no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-

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 4000 1.18
+638%
G 105M 0.16

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 4000 454
+632%
G 105M 62

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 4000 2959
+276%
G 105M 788

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:

900p12
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Full HD10
+900%
1−2
−900%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+14.3%
27−30
−14.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+14.3%
27−30
−14.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+14.3%
27−30
−14.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how HD Graphics 4000 and G 105M compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 4000 is 1100% faster in 900p
  • HD Graphics 4000 is 900% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD Graphics 4000 is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 4000 is ahead in 27 tests (93%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.18 0.16
Recency 14 May 2012 8 January 2009
Chip lithography 22 nm 65 nm

HD Graphics 4000 has a 637.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 195.5% more advanced lithography process.

The HD Graphics 4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce G 105M 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 4000
HD Graphics 4000
NVIDIA GeForce G 105M
GeForce G 105M

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.


3.1 5263 votes

Rate HD Graphics 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 45 votes

Rate GeForce G 105M 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.