Radeon RX 6750 GRE vs HD Graphics 500
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics 500 with Radeon RX 6750 GRE, including specs and performance data.
6750 GRE outperforms HD Graphics 500 by a whopping 6206% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1225 | 91 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 48.62 |
| Power efficiency | 9.22 | 13.95 |
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 (2015−2016) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | Apollo Lake GT1 | Navi 22 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 September 2015 (10 years ago) | 17 October 2023 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $549 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 650 MHz | 2581 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 189 million | 17,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 7.800 | 413.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1248 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 2 | 64 |
| TMUs | 12 | 160 |
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 | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
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 | DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 18 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 432.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |
| HDMI | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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 | 10
−5900%
| 600−650
+5900%
|
| 1440p | 1
−5900%
| 60−65
+5900%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 0.92 |
| 1440p | no data | 9.15 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−5900%
|
120−130
+5900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−5900%
|
300−310
+5900%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−5900%
|
120−130
+5900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−5900%
|
60−65
+5900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−5900%
|
300−310
+5900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−5900%
|
300−310
+5900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−6150%
|
500−550
+6150%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−6107%
|
1800−1850
+6107%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 20−22
−6150%
|
1250−1300
+6150%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−5900%
|
120−130
+5900%
|
| Dota 2 | 6
−5733%
|
350−400
+5733%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−5900%
|
60−65
+5900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−5900%
|
300−310
+5900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−5900%
|
300−310
+5900%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−5900%
|
60−65
+5900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−6150%
|
500−550
+6150%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−5733%
|
350−400
+5733%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−6107%
|
1800−1850
+6107%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−5900%
|
120−130
+5900%
|
| Dota 2 | 5
−5900%
|
300−310
+5900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−5900%
|
60−65
+5900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−5900%
|
300−310
+5900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−5900%
|
300−310
+5900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−6150%
|
500−550
+6150%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−5733%
|
350−400
+5733%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−6107%
|
1800−1850
+6107%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−5900%
|
180−190
+5900%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 4−5
−6150%
|
250−260
+6150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−6150%
|
500−550
+6150%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1
−5900%
|
60−65
+5900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−5900%
|
120−130
+5900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−5900%
|
120−130
+5900%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−5900%
|
60−65
+5900%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−5971%
|
850−900
+5971%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−6150%
|
250−260
+6150%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−5900%
|
120−130
+5900%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−5900%
|
120−130
+5900%
|
This is how HD Graphics 500 and RX 6750 GRE compete in popular games:
- RX 6750 GRE is 5900% faster in 1080p
- RX 6750 GRE is 5900% faster in 1440p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.72 | 45.40 |
| Recency | 1 September 2015 | 17 October 2023 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 12 GB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 250 Watt |
HD Graphics 500 has 2400% lower power consumption.
RX 6750 GRE, on the other hand, has a 6205.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 6750 GRE is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 500 in performance tests.
Be aware that HD Graphics 500 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon RX 6750 GRE is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
