HD Graphics 4000 vs Iris Pro Graphics 6200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Pro Graphics 6200 and HD Graphics 4000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Iris Pro Graphics 6200
2014
15 Watt
3.96
+236%

Iris Pro Graphics 6200 outperforms HD Graphics 4000 by a whopping 236% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7001070
Place by popularitynot in top-10045
Power efficiency18.221.81
ArchitectureGeneration 8.0 (2014−2015)Generation 7.0 (2012−2013)
GPU code nameBroadwell GT3eIvy Bridge GT2
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 September 2014 (10 years ago)14 May 2012 (12 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 cores384128
Core clock speed300 MHz650 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz1000 MHz
Number of transistors189 million1,200 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm22 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattunknown
Texture fill rate52.8016.00
Floating-point processing power0.8448 TFLOPS0.256 TFLOPS
ROPs62
TMUs4816

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceRing BusRing Bus

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 SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
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 DependentPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)11.1 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.44.0
OpenCL3.01.2
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.

Iris Pro Graphics 6200 3.96
+236%
HD Graphics 4000 1.18

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.

Iris Pro Graphics 6200 1523
+235%
HD Graphics 4000 454

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.

Iris Pro Graphics 6200 2766
+429%
HD Graphics 4000 523

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.

Iris Pro Graphics 6200 1737
+262%
HD Graphics 4000 480

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.

Iris Pro Graphics 6200 15388
+308%
HD Graphics 4000 3769

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:

900p40−45
+233%
12
−233%
Full HD35−40
+218%
11
−218%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Elden Ring 9−10 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Valorant 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Dota 2 12−14
+100%
6
−100%
Elden Ring 9−10 0−1
Far Cry 5 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Fortnite 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+169%
12−14
−169%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Valorant 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
World of Tanks 65−70
+219%
21
−219%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Dota 2 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+169%
12−14
−169%
Valorant 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 2−3 0−1
Elden Ring 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+300%
7−8
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4 0−1
World of Tanks 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Valorant 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Elden Ring 2−3 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Far Cry 5 4−5 0−1
Fortnite 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3 0−1
Valorant 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

This is how Iris Pro Graphics 6200 and HD Graphics 4000 compete in popular games:

  • Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is 233% faster in 900p
  • Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is 218% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is 1100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is ahead in 39 tests (95%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (5%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.96 1.18
Recency 5 September 2014 14 May 2012
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm

Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has a 235.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

The Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 4000 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 Iris Pro Graphics 6200
Iris Pro Graphics 6200
Intel HD Graphics 4000
HD Graphics 4000

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.


3.3 85 votes

Rate Iris Pro Graphics 6200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 5358 votes

Rate HD Graphics 4000 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.