Radeon R5 A335 vs HD Graphics 4400

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1016not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.67no data
ArchitectureGeneration 7.5 (2013)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameHaswell GT2Exo
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date3 September 2013 (11 years ago)21 October 2015 (9 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 cores160320
Core clock speed200 MHz1070 MHz
Boost clock speed950 MHzno data
Number of transistors392 million690 million
Manufacturing process technology22 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Wattno data
Texture fill rate19.0021.40
Floating-point processing power0.304 TFLOPS0.6848 TFLOPS
ROPs28
TMUs2020

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 3.0 x8
WidthIGPno data
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 Shared2 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared900 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data14.4 GB/s
Shared memory+no data

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

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.

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.34.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 September 2013 21 October 2015
Chip lithography 22 nm 28 nm

HD Graphics 4400 has a 27.3% more advanced lithography process.

R5 A335, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years.

We couldn't decide between HD Graphics 4400 and Radeon R5 A335. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that HD Graphics 4400 is a desktop card while Radeon R5 A335 is a notebook one.


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 4400
HD Graphics 4400
AMD Radeon R5 A335
Radeon R5 A335

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 1425 votes

Rate HD Graphics 4400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon R5 A335 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.