A10G vs HD Graphics 405
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics 405 with A10G, including specs and performance data.
A10G outperforms HD Graphics 405 by a whopping 6484% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1166 | 67 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 8.49 | 22.36 |
| Architecture | Generation 8.0 (2014−2015) | Ampere (2020−2024) |
| GPU code name | Braswell GT1 | GA102 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 1 April 2015 (9 years ago) | 12 April 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 | 128 | 9216 |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz | 1320 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 600 MHz | 1710 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 189 million | 28,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 9.600 | 492.5 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1536 TFLOPS | 31.52 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 2 | 96 |
| TMUs | 16 | 288 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 288 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 72 |
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 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 8-pin EPS |
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 | 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 1563 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 600.2 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 compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | + | 1.2 |
| CUDA | - | 8.6 |
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 | 15
−6233%
| 950−1000
+6233%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−6011%
|
550−600
+6011%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−6233%
|
190−200
+6233%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−6011%
|
550−600
+6011%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−6233%
|
190−200
+6233%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−6329%
|
450−500
+6329%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
−5900%
|
300−310
+5900%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−6011%
|
550−600
+6011%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−6233%
|
190−200
+6233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
−6150%
|
500−550
+6150%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−6400%
|
130−140
+6400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−6329%
|
450−500
+6329%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−6400%
|
650−700
+6400%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
−5900%
|
300−310
+5900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−5733%
|
350−400
+5733%
|
| World of Tanks | 18−20
−6479%
|
1250−1300
+6479%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−6011%
|
550−600
+6011%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−6233%
|
190−200
+6233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
−6150%
|
500−550
+6150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−6329%
|
450−500
+6329%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−6400%
|
650−700
+6400%
|
1440p
High Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−6400%
|
260−270
+6400%
|
| World of Tanks | 3−4
−6233%
|
190−200
+6233%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−6233%
|
190−200
+6233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−6400%
|
260−270
+6400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−6400%
|
260−270
+6400%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−5900%
|
300−310
+5900%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
−6150%
|
500−550
+6150%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−6233%
|
950−1000
+6233%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−6233%
|
950−1000
+6233%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−6400%
|
130−140
+6400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−6233%
|
950−1000
+6233%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−6400%
|
65−70
+6400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
−6150%
|
500−550
+6150%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−6400%
|
130−140
+6400%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−6233%
|
950−1000
+6233%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−6400%
|
65−70
+6400%
|
This is how HD Graphics 405 and A10G compete in popular games:
- A10G is 6233% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.74 | 48.72 |
| Recency | 1 April 2015 | 12 April 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 150 Watt |
HD Graphics 405 has 2400% lower power consumption.
A10G, on the other hand, has a 6483.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.
The A10G is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 405 in performance tests.
Be aware that HD Graphics 405 is a notebook card while A10G is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
