Radeon R4 (Kaveri) vs HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) and Radeon R4 (Kaveri), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
2011
0.33

R4 (Kaveri) outperforms HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) by a whopping 148% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking13081143
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGen. 6 Sandy Bridge (2011)GCN 1.1 (2014)
GPU code nameSandy BridgeKaveri
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 May 2011 (13 years ago)4 June 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 cores6192
Core clock speed350 MHz533 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data2410 Million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm28 nm

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 bus width64/128 Bit64/128 Bit
Shared memory++

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX10.112 (FL 12_0)

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.

HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) 0.33
R4 (Kaveri) 0.82
+148%

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3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution.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 (Sandy Bridge) 976
R4 (Kaveri) 1958
+101%

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Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks.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 (Sandy Bridge) 1405
R4 (Kaveri) 3372
+140%

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 HD8
+0%
8
+0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
World of Tanks 10
−30%
13
+30%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 1−2
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Valorant 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High Preset

World of Tanks 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) and R4 (Kaveri) compete in popular games:

  • A tie 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 R4 (Kaveri) is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R4 (Kaveri) is ahead in 21 test (64%)
  • there's a draw in 12 tests (36%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.33 0.82
Recency 1 May 2011 4 June 2014
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm

R4 (Kaveri) has a 148.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R4 (Kaveri) is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) in performance tests.

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 (Sandy Bridge)
HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
AMD Radeon R4 (Kaveri)
Radeon R4 (Kaveri)

Other comparisons

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.


2.7 85 votes

Rate HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 11 votes

Rate Radeon R4 (Kaveri) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) or Radeon R4 (Kaveri), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.