HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) vs Radeon HD 8280E

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8280E and HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 8280E
2013
15 Watt
0.66
+46.7%

HD 8280E outperforms HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) by a considerable 47% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11861241
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.02no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Gen. 8 (2015−2016)
GPU code nameKalindiBraswell
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date23 April 2013 (11 years ago)1 April 2016 (8 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 cores12812
Core clock speed450 MHz320 MHz
Boost clock speedno data640 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rate3.600no data
Floating-point processing power0.1152 TFLOPSno data
ROPs4no data
TMUs8no 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).

InterfaceIGPno 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 Shared64/128 Bit
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

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11.2
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

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 HD8−9
+33.3%
6
−33.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hitman 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hitman 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hitman 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how HD 8280E and HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) compete in popular games:

  • HD 8280E is 33% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 29 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.66 0.45
Recency 23 April 2013 1 April 2016
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm

HD 8280E has a 46.7% higher aggregate performance score.

HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon HD 8280E is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) 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.


AMD Radeon HD 8280E
Radeon HD 8280E
Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)

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.


3.1 15 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8280E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 242 votes

Rate HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) 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.