Quadro FX 1800M vs HD Graphics

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
HD Graphics HD Graphics 6EU HD Graphics 12EU HD Graphics 2500 HD Graphics P530 HD Graphics P630 HD Graphics P3000 HD Graphics P4000 HD Graphics P4600 HD Graphics P4700 HD Graphics P5700
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Quadro FX 1500M Quadro FX 1600M Quadro FX 1700M Quadro FX 1800M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics with Quadro FX 1800M, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics
2012
35 Watt
0.78

FX 1800M outperforms HD Graphics by an impressive 65% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

HD Graphics HD Graphics
FX 1800M FX 1800M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11631047
Place by popularity68not in top-100
Power efficiency1.531.97
ArchitectureGeneration 7.0 (2012−2013)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameIvy Bridge GT1GT215
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date1 April 2012 (12 years ago)15 June 2009 (15 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 cores4872
Core clock speed650 MHz561 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHzno data
Number of transistors392 million727 million
Manufacturing process technology22 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate6.30013.46
Floating-point processing power0.1008 TFLOPS0.162 TFLOPS
ROPs18
TMUs624

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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
WidthIGPno 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared550 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data35.2 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

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (11_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.04.1
OpenGL4.03.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.80N/A
CUDA-+

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 0.78
FX 1800M 1.29
+65.4%

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.

HD Graphics 299
FX 1800M 494
+65.2%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 48 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.78 1.29
Recency 1 April 2012 15 June 2009
Chip lithography 22 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 45 Watt

HD Graphics has an age advantage of 2 years, a 81.8% more advanced lithography process, and 28.6% lower power consumption.

FX 1800M, on the other hand, has a 65.4% higher aggregate performance score.

The Quadro FX 1800M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics is a desktop card while Quadro FX 1800M is a mobile workstation one.

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
HD Graphics
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800M
Quadro FX 1800M
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

HD Graphics HD Graphics
vs
ATI HD 2900 GT Radeon HD 2900 GT
FX 1800M Quadro FX 1800M
vs
NVS 5200M NVS 5200M
HD Graphics HD Graphics
vs
7800 GTX GeForce 7800 GTX
FirePro W4000 FirePro W4000
vs
RTX A1000 Mobile RTX A1000 Mobile
GTX 1080 SLI Mobile GeForce GTX 1080 SLI Mobile
vs
NVS 450 Quadro NVS 450
Parhelia 128 MB
vs
RTX 3050 8 GB GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB
GT 730 GeForce GT 730
vs
RTX 2070 Super Max-Q GeForce RTX 2070 Super Max-Q
RTX 3050 OEM RTX 3050 OEM
vs
RX 6750 GRE 12 GB 6750 GRE 12 GB
GTX 280 GeForce GTX 280
vs
Tegra X1 GPU Tegra X1 GPU
ATI DDR Radeon DDR
vs
RTX 3090 Ti GeForce RTX 3090 Ti
R7 260 Radeon R7 260
vs
RX 580 2048SP Radeon RX 580 2048SP
Pro V340 MxGPU Radeon Pro V340 MxGPU
vs
RTX 3090 Ti GeForce RTX 3090 Ti
Tesla K80 Tesla K80
vs
FX 5800 Quadro FX 5800

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

2.3 2283 votes

Rate HD Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 6 votes

Rate Quadro FX 1800M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about HD Graphics or Quadro FX 1800M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.