Radeon Pro 570 vs HD Graphics 5000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 5000 with Radeon Pro 570, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 5000
2013
30 Watt
1.51

Pro 570 outperforms HD Graphics 5000 by a whopping 987% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking977327
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGen. 7.5 Haswell (2012−2013)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameHaswell GT3Polaris 20
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date5 June 2013 (11 years ago)5 June 2017 (7 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores401792
Core clock speed200 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz1105 MHz
Number of transistors1,300 million5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology22 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate44.00123.8
Floating-point performance0.704 gflops3.96 gflops

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus width64/128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data6780 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data217.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo 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 graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.34.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.1.801.2.131

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 5000 1.51
Pro 570 16.42
+987%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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 5000 584
Pro 570 6336
+985%

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 HD11
−900%
110−120
+900%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−983%
65−70
+983%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Hitman 3 6−7
−983%
65−70
+983%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−967%
160−170
+967%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−963%
85−90
+963%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−961%
350−400
+961%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−983%
65−70
+983%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Hitman 3 6−7
−983%
65−70
+983%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−967%
160−170
+967%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−963%
85−90
+963%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−900%
110−120
+900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−961%
350−400
+961%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−983%
65−70
+983%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Hitman 3 6−7
−983%
65−70
+983%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−967%
160−170
+967%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−963%
85−90
+963%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−900%
110−120
+900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−961%
350−400
+961%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Hitman 3 7−8
−971%
75−80
+971%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
−971%
75−80
+971%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%

This is how HD Graphics 5000 and Pro 570 compete in popular games:

  • Pro 570 is 900% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.51 16.42
Recency 5 June 2013 5 June 2017
Chip lithography 22 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 120 Watt

HD Graphics 5000 has 300% lower power consumption.

Pro 570, on the other hand, has a 987.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro 570 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 5000 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 5000 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro 570 is a mobile workstation 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 5000
HD Graphics 5000
AMD Radeon Pro 570
Radeon Pro 570

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.


3.2 178 votes

Rate HD Graphics 5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 51 vote

Rate Radeon Pro 570 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.