UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) vs HD Graphics

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics with UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU), including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics
2012
35 Watt
0.77

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) outperforms HD Graphics by a whopping 157% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1163903
Place by popularity68not in top-100
Power efficiency1.5313.74
ArchitectureGeneration 7.0 (2012−2013)Gen. 11 (2021)
GPU code nameIvy Bridge GT1Gen. 11
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 April 2012 (12 years ago)11 January 2021 (4 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 cores4832
Core clock speed650 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz900 MHz
Number of transistors392 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology22 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt4.8 - 10 Watt
Texture fill rate6.300no data
Floating-point processing power0.1008 TFLOPSno data
ROPs1no data
TMUs6no 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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16no data
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 Sharedno data
Maximum RAM amountSystem Sharedno data
Memory bus widthSystem Sharedno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (11_0)12_1
Shader Model5.0no data
OpenGL4.0no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.1.80-

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 0.77
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) 1.98
+157%

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 300
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) 1016
+239%

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 HD3−4
−167%
8
+167%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 1
+0%
1
+0%
Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 12
+0%
12
+0%
Far Cry 5 1
+0%
1
+0%
Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 2
+0%
2
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
+0%
4
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 11
+0%
11
+0%
Far Cry 5 1
+0%
1
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3
+0%
3
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

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

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how HD Graphics and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is 167% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 56 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.77 1.98
Recency 1 April 2012 11 January 2021
Chip lithography 22 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 4 Watt

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) has a 157.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 120% more advanced lithography process, and 775% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics is a desktop card while UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is a notebook 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
Intel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU)
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU)

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.


2.3 2282 votes

Rate HD Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 19 votes

Rate UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) 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 UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.