HD Graphics 6000 vs Radeon Vega Frontier Edition

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Vega Frontier Edition with HD Graphics 6000, including specs and performance data.

Vega Frontier Edition
2017
16 GB HBM2, 300 Watt
29.12
+1433%

Vega Frontier Edition outperforms HD Graphics 6000 by a whopping 1433% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking164871
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation19.22no data
Power efficiency7.6710.01
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)
GPU code nameVega 10Broadwell GT3
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date27 June 2017 (7 years ago)5 September 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores4096384
Core clock speed1382 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1600 MHz950 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)300 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate409.645.60
Floating-point processing power13.11 TFLOPS0.7296 TFLOPS
ROPs646
TMUs25648

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 x16Ring Bus
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinno 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 typeHBM2System Shared
Maximum RAM amount16 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width2048 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed945 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth483.8 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_1)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.1.125+

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.

Vega Frontier Edition 29.12
+1433%
HD Graphics 6000 1.90

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.

Vega Frontier Edition 13013
+1433%
HD Graphics 6000 849

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 HD220−230
+1367%
15
−1367%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.54no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 17
+0%
17
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 15
+0%
15
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how Vega Frontier Edition and HD Graphics 6000 compete in popular games:

  • Vega Frontier Edition is 1367% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 53 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 29.12 1.90
Recency 27 June 2017 5 September 2014
Power consumption (TDP) 300 Watt 15 Watt

Vega Frontier Edition has a 1432.6% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 years.

HD Graphics 6000, on the other hand, has 1900% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Vega Frontier Edition is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 6000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Vega Frontier Edition is a workstation card while HD Graphics 6000 is a notebook one.

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 Vega Frontier Edition
Radeon Vega Frontier Edition
Intel HD Graphics 6000
HD Graphics 6000

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.


3.4 29 votes

Rate Radeon Vega Frontier Edition on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 266 votes

Rate HD Graphics 6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Vega Frontier Edition or HD Graphics 6000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.