HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) vs HD Graphics 6000
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics 6000 and HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
HD Graphics 6000 outperforms HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) by a whopping 542% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 868 | 1308 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 10.14 | no data |
| Architecture | Generation 8.0 (2014−2015) | Gen. 6 Sandy Bridge (2011) |
| GPU code name | Broadwell GT3 | Sandy Bridge |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 5 September 2014 (10 years ago) | 1 May 2011 (13 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 | 384 | 6 |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 350 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 950 MHz | 1100 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 189 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 45.60 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.7296 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 6 | no data |
| TMUs | 48 | no 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).
| Interface | Ring Bus | no 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 type | System Shared | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | no data |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 64/128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | no data |
| 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 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 and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 10.1 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | no data |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | no 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.
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.
3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.
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 | 13
+62.5%
| 8
−62.5%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+233%
|
3−4
−233%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 9−10
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 6 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 12
+71.4%
|
7−8
−71.4%
|
| Fortnite | 10−12
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+233%
|
3−4
−233%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+200%
|
7−8
−200%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 9−10
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| World of Tanks | 40−45
+320%
|
10
−320%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 15
+650%
|
2−3
−650%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+100%
|
7−8
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+233%
|
3−4
−233%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+200%
|
7−8
−200%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+600%
|
2−3
−600%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| World of Tanks | 14−16
+600%
|
2−3
−600%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Valorant | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
This is how HD Graphics 6000 and HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) compete in popular games:
- HD Graphics 6000 is 63% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the HD Graphics 6000 is 600% faster.
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) is 67% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD Graphics 6000 is ahead in 27 tests (87%)
- HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) is ahead in 1 test (3%)
- there's a draw in 3 tests (10%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.12 | 0.33 |
| Recency | 5 September 2014 | 1 May 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 32 nm |
HD Graphics 6000 has a 542.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.
The HD Graphics 6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
