HD Graphics 510 vs Radeon 530

Place in the ranking	807	952
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	3.67	7.43
Architecture	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)	Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)
GPU code name	Weston	Skylake GT1
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	18 April 2017 (7 years ago)	1 September 2015 (9 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 cores	384	96
Core clock speed	730 MHz	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	1024 MHz	900 MHz
Number of transistors	1,550 million	189 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm+
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	24.58	10.80
Floating-point processing power	0.7864 TFLOPS	0.1728 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	3
TMUs	24	12

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	Ring Bus
Width	no data	IGP
Supplementary power connectors	None	no 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 type	DDR3/GDDR5	LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	32 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	14.4 GB/s	no 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 Connectors

No outputs

Portable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.3	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3

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
+64.6%

HD Graphics 510 1.61

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.

Radeon 530 1021
+64.1%

HD Graphics 510 622

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
+175%

HD Graphics 510 847

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
+66.9%

HD Graphics 510 3798

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
+148%

HD Graphics 510 621

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
+62.6%

HD Graphics 510 5664

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Radeon 530 107458
+148%

HD Graphics 510 43274

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

Radeon 530 17
+82.8%

HD Graphics 510 9

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 HD

14
+75%

8−9

−75%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6
+25%

4−5

−25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16 +167%	6−7 −167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8 +100%	4−5 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry 5	10 +400%	2−3 −400%
Far Cry New Dawn	12 +300%	3−4 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	35 +1067%	3−4 −1067%
Hitman 3	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +40%	14−16 −40%
Metro Exodus	13 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	13 +550%	2−3 −550%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18 +125%	8−9 −125%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +15.2%	30−35 −15.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7 +75%	4−5 −75%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	32 +967%	3−4 −967%
Hitman 3	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +40%	14−16 −40%
Metro Exodus	5 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9 +350%	2−3 −350%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +18.2%	10−12 −18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +15.2%	30−35 −15.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%
Hitman 3	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +40%	14−16 −40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6 −83.3%	10−12 +83.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +15.2%	30−35 −15.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
+200%

2−3

−200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
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 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
+50%

4−5

−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
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
+33.3%

3−4

−33.3%

This is how Radeon 530 and HD Graphics 510 compete in popular games:

Radeon 530 is 75% faster in 1080p

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 530 is 1067% faster.
in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD Graphics 510 is 83% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Radeon 530 is ahead in 45 tests (92%)
HD Graphics 510 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
there's a draw in 3 tests (6%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.65	1.61
Recency	18 April 2017	1 September 2015
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	32 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	15 Watt

Radeon 530 has a 64.6% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

HD Graphics 510, on the other hand, has a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 530 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 510 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon 530 is a notebook card while HD Graphics 510 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.