Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) vs HD Graphics 620

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 620 and Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics 620
2016
32 GB DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4, 15 Watt
2.42
+124%

HD Graphics 620 outperforms R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) by a whopping 124% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8401087
Place by popularity64not in top-100
Power efficiency11.23no data
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)GCN 1.1 (2014)
GPU code nameKaby Lake GT2Beema
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date30 August 2016 (8 years ago)29 April 2014 (10 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 cores192128
Core clock speed300 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1000 MHz850 MHz
Number of transistors189 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm++28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rate24.00no data
Floating-point processing power0.384 TFLOPSno data
ROPs3no data
TMUs24no 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).

InterfaceRing Busno 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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4no data
Maximum RAM amount32 GBno data
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno 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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependentno 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 compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (FL 12_0)
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL3.0no 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. 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 620 2.42
+124%
R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 1.08

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

HD Graphics 620 1509
+97.4%
R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 764

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.

HD Graphics 620 5803
+115%
R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 2698

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD Graphics 620 934
+73.3%
R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 539

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.

HD Graphics 620 7725
+133%
R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 3317

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

HD Graphics 620 79067
+115%
R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 36807

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 HD13
+117%
6
−117%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 6
+500%
1−2
−500%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 25 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+53.8%
12−14
−53.8%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14
+100%
7−8
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+15.6%
30−35
−15.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+53.8%
12−14
−53.8%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+36.4%
10−12
−36.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+15.6%
30−35
−15.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+53.8%
12−14
−53.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+15.6%
30−35
−15.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

This is how HD Graphics 620 and R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 620 is 117% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD Graphics 620 is 500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 620 is ahead in 41 test (95%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (5%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.42 1.08
Recency 30 August 2016 29 April 2014
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm

HD Graphics 620 has a 124.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The HD Graphics 620 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) in performance tests.


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 620
HD Graphics 620
AMD Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)
Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)

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 2664 votes

Rate HD Graphics 620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 21 vote

Rate Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 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.