How does intel hd 4000 compare

Cons: Absolutely abysmal performance. If you have the option to use dedicated graphics or an eGPU, use that instead. This can barely play minecraft at p at medium settings at fps. Overclock if possible. It's enough for watching HD videos.

That's all, for better or worse. Is enough for Minecraft and p youtube videos. Old and terrible. Whines so loud i can barely hear my laptop audio whenever any game made after is loaded. New portable graphics cards are substantially better. It's a decent iGPU for my eight year old dell laptop. Older video games from the 's can be played in p. Crysis does struggle to get above 30fps on the lowest settings at p.

Don't recommend it for gaming and watch videos only at p since when its at p it will start to lag, i manage to record videos on p60fps with a iU though. Tried to play World of Tanks Blitz. It worked but ran worse than an Ipad air from Totally terrible. Ran the game at 50fps on high, not maxed out settings.

See how consistently different GPUs perform with varying real world conditions. The charts also illustrate overall performance, popularity and rank.

Save as guest. HD Mobile 1. Average Bench: 2. Based on , user benchmarks. This isn't a great result which indicates that there are much faster alternatives on the comparison list. Strengths Avg. Locally-deformable PRT Bat 3. NBody particle system Galaxy 2. This is an extremely narrow range which indicates that the Intel HD Mobile 1. Weaknesses Avg. High dynamic range lighting Teapot 3. Parallax occlusion mapping Stones 2. Average Bench Based on , samples.

Rank 2. TUR-User, 11 mins ago. SYC-User, 22 mins ago. FRA-User, 15 mins ago. USA-User, 8 mins ago. FRA-User, 18 mins ago. Popular Cards Based on statistics from , user benchmarks. Hide stale prices. I have a machine with a decent mobo, an i7 k and 8Gb ram Graphics are quite good with the integrated card. I am about getting a dedicated graphics card but I don't know how to compare the IntelGraphics with the cards out there.

Is there a way to compare my integrated graphics with other cards? Even in terms of performance, if not in terms of specs. Your individual observed performance improvement will depend on many things. I think it is safe to say that you will observe an improvement on graphics performance with a mid- or top-range graphics card, especially because the graphics performance is likely to be the bottleneck in your system.

Anything that offloads onto the system has an immediate performance hit since you are having to take away resources from the system that could be used instead to process other information like parsing a web site or calculating the bullets trajectory in your 3D FPS.

A dedicated card will take over that extra processing and in some cases even allow you to use it as a second CPU , immediately gaining performance for your system even if marginal. Comparing the different brands of cards is also a little more complicated i. Nvidia cards vs. Intel cards because of how they work at a hardware level CUDE cores vs.

It should give some clarity as to why comparing them isn't as simple as some benchmark testing though benchmarks can be a good visual indicator. The real question to ask is what is the driving force of your decision to get a new dedicated card? Is it gaming, gfx editing, 3D rending, or just for some slight system performance increase? It's a lot like choosing a car; a Porche Boxster is a blazing sports car, but extreme overkill to pick up the groceries, just like a Honda Civic is an economical car but wouldn't stand a chance in an uphill race against the former.

The most important factor to answering your question is "What do you want to use it for? That said, Tom's Hardware, in my humble opinion, has the best information available on what you can expect from your hardware and what will be the best value in multiple dollar ranges and workloads.

Here is their graphics hierarchy chart, which includes dedicated and integrated cards. Tom's Hardware Graphics Hierarchy. Best Graphics Cards for the Money. Unlike previous posters, I will tell you that when you want to compare across the spectrum, benchmarks are what you want to look at in terms of performance, rather than the technical specifications.

Tom's covers a broad range of tasks and you can see where one card may do well in one area, but be outperformed in another. Choose the one that benchmarks best in your targeted area. That means the most important piece of information for you to determine is the question that I asked first, "What do you want to use it for?

It really depends on what you want to do. And there are so many variables to include that comparing raw numbers simply does not make sense: efficiency of a graphics card depends on many more factors than just only on clock rates and amount of on-card RAM.

SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 maya SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 lightwave SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 ensight SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 catia Windows 7 Experience Index - Win7 Gaming graphics. Windows 7 Experience Index - Win7 Graphics. Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Shading 32bit. Cinebench R HD Graphics P HD Graphics HD Graphics Broadwell.

HD Graphics Skylake. HD Graphics Braswell. HD Graphics Haswell. HD Graphics Cherry Trail. HD Graphics Ivy Bridge. HD Graphics Sandy Bridge. HD Graphics Bay Trail. Intel Core iXM. Intel Core iQM. Intel Core iK. Intel Core iM. Intel Core iU. Intel Core iY.

Vizio CTA0. Panasonic Toughpad FZ-G1. HP EliteBook Revolve Fujitsu Lifebook E Premium Selection. Dell XPS Toshiba Satellite UT HD Graphics MHz. Fujitsu Stylistic Q Acer Aspire PY2G06as. HP Split x2. Gigabyte S Toshiba WT