Radeon HD 6450 vs UHD Graphics 600

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics 600 with Radeon HD 6450, including specs and performance data.

UHD Graphics 600
2017
5 Watt
0.87
+70.6%

UHD Graphics 600 outperforms HD 6450 by an impressive 71% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11411244
Place by popularity52not in top-100
Power efficiency11.931.94
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGemini Lake GT1Caicos
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date11 December 2017 (7 years ago)7 April 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$55

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 cores96160
Core clock speed200 MHzno data
Boost clock speed650 MHz750 MHz
Number of transistors189 million370 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)5 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate7.8005.000
Floating-point processing power0.1248 TFLOPS0.2 TFLOPS
ROPs24
TMUs128

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).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 2.0 x8
InterfaceRing BusPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s
Memory bandwidthno data8.5-12.8 GB/x (DDR3) or 25.6-28.8 GB/s (GDDR5)
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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
Eyefinity-+
Number of Eyefinity displaysno data4
HDMI-+
DisplayPort support-+

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire-+
Quick Sync+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)DirectX® 11
Shader Model6.45.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL3.01.2
Vulkan+-

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.

UHD Graphics 600 0.87
+70.6%
HD 6450 0.51

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.

UHD Graphics 600 334
+69.5%
HD 6450 197

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.

UHD Graphics 600 433
+27.4%
HD 6450 340

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 HD10
+100%
5−6
−100%
1440p10−1

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data11.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Valorant 13
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 7
+75%
4−5
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Valorant 11
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 7
+75%
4−5
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Valorant 30−33
+87.5%
16−18
−87.5%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Valorant 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

This is how UHD Graphics 600 and HD 6450 compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 600 is 100% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.87 0.51
Recency 11 December 2017 7 April 2011
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 5 Watt 30 Watt

UHD Graphics 600 has a 70.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 500% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6450 in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics 600 is a notebook card while Radeon HD 6450 is a desktop 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.


Intel UHD Graphics 600
UHD Graphics 600
AMD Radeon HD 6450
Radeon HD 6450

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 3686 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 535 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about UHD Graphics 600 or Radeon HD 6450, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.