HD Graphics 2500 vs Radeon 530

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon 530 with HD Graphics 2500, including specs and performance data.

Radeon 530
2017
4 GB DDR3/GDDR5, 50 Watt
2.65
+284%

530 outperforms HD Graphics 2500 by a whopping 284% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8071167
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.67no data
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Generation 7.0 (2012−2013)
GPU code nameWestonIvy Bridge GT1
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date18 April 2017 (7 years ago)1 April 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 cores38448
Core clock speed730 MHz650 MHz
Boost clock speed1024 MHz1150 MHz
Number of transistors1,550 million392 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm22 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Wattunknown
Texture fill rate24.586.900
Floating-point processing power0.7864 TFLOPS0.1104 TFLOPS
ROPs81
TMUs246

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 3.0 x8PCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeDDR3/GDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/sno 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 outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11.1 (11_0)
Shader Model6.35.0
OpenGL4.64.0
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.80

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. 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.

Radeon 530 2.65
+284%
HD Graphics 2500 0.69

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.

Radeon 530 2327
+564%
HD Graphics 2500 351

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.

Radeon 530 6338
+228%
HD Graphics 2500 1931

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.

Radeon 530 1542
+385%
HD Graphics 2500 318

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.

Radeon 530 9210
+254%
HD Graphics 2500 2605

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 HD14
+100%
7
−100%

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 16
+300%
4−5
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 10
+400%
2−3
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 12
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Forza Horizon 4 35
+289%
9−10
−289%
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+90.9%
10−12
−90.9%
Metro Exodus 13
+333%
3−4
−333%
Red Dead Redemption 2 13 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18
+200%
6−7
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+26.7%
30−33
−26.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7
+133%
3−4
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 32
+300%
8−9
−300%
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+90.9%
10−12
−90.9%
Metro Exodus 5
+400%
1−2
−400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+26.7%
30−33
−26.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+90.9%
10−12
−90.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+26.7%
30−33
−26.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7 0−1

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 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 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 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

This is how Radeon 530 and HD Graphics 2500 compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 530 is 100% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 530 is 1100% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD Graphics 2500 is 67% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Radeon 530 is ahead in 33 tests (94%)
  • HD Graphics 2500 is ahead in 1 test (3%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.65 0.69
Recency 18 April 2017 1 April 2012
Chip lithography 28 nm 22 nm

Radeon 530 has a 284.1% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 5 years.

HD Graphics 2500, on the other hand, has a 27.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon 530 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 2500 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon 530 is a notebook card while HD Graphics 2500 is a desktop one.


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.


AMD Radeon 530
Radeon 530
Intel HD Graphics 2500
HD Graphics 2500

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.


3.2 712 votes

Rate Radeon 530 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 1333 votes

Rate HD Graphics 2500 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.