HD Graphics 2000 vs Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

Place in the ranking	765	1211
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Architecture	GCN (2012−2015)	Generation 6.0 (2011)
GPU code name	Kaveri Spectre	Sandy Bridge GT1
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	14 January 2014 (10 years ago)	1 February 2011 (13 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	512	48
Core clock speed	720 MHz	850 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1350 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	189 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	unknown
Texture fill rate	no data	8.100
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.1296 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	1
TMUs	no data	6

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	no data	PCIe 1.0 x16
Width	no data	IGP

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	no data	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	no data	System Shared
Memory bus width	no data	System Shared
Memory clock speed	no data	System 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 Connectors

no data

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (FL 12_0)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	no data	4.1
OpenGL	no data	3.1
OpenCL	no data	N/A
Vulkan	-	N/A

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

18
+63.6%

−63.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7
+200%

2−3

−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	5−6	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Hitman 3	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +188%	8−9 −188%
Metro Exodus	4−5	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +39.3%	27−30 −39.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	5−6	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Hitman 3	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +188%	8−9 −188%
Metro Exodus	4−5	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27 +200%	9−10 −200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +39.3%	27−30 −39.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Hitman 3	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +188%	8−9 −188%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6 −50%	9−10 +50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +39.3%	27−30 −39.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+600%

1−2

−600%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Hitman 3	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
+200%

2−3

−200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3	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
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+100%

2−3

−100%

This is how R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) and HD Graphics 2000 compete in popular games:

R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is 64% faster in 1080p

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

in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is 300% faster.
in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD Graphics 2000 is 50% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is ahead in 28 tests (97%)
HD Graphics 2000 is ahead in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.04	0.55
Recency	14 January 2014	1 February 2011
Chip lithography	28 nm	32 nm

R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) has a 452.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 2000 in performance tests.

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