
HD Graphics 520 vs GRID M10-0B

HD Graphics 520
Popular choices:

GRID M10-0B
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The HD Graphics 520 is positioned at rank 389 and the GRID M10-0B is on rank 403, so the HD Graphics 520 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar HD Graphics 520
Performance Per Dollar GRID M10-0B
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID M10-0B is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.2% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (512 MB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the HD Graphics 520.
| Insight | HD Graphics 520 | GRID M10-0B |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100+%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The HD Graphics 520 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the HD Graphics 520 holds the technical lead. Priced at $35 (vs $1,000), it costs 97% less, resulting in a 2724.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | HD Graphics 520 | GRID M10-0B |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+2724.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($35) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($1,000) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of HD Graphics 520 and GRID M10-0B

HD Graphics 520
The HD Graphics 520 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in September 1 2015. It features the Generation 9.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 300 MHz to 900 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 14 nm+ process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 861 points.

GRID M10-0B
The GRID M10-0B is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 18 2016. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1033 MHz to 1306 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 871 points.
Graphics Performance
The HD Graphics 520 scores 861 and the GRID M10-0B reaches 871 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The HD Graphics 520 is built on Generation 9.0 while the GRID M10-0B uses Maxwell, both on 14 nm+ vs 28 nm. Shader units: 192 (HD Graphics 520) vs 640 (GRID M10-0B). Raw compute: 0.3456 TFLOPS (HD Graphics 520) vs 1.672 TFLOPS (GRID M10-0B). Boost clocks: 900 MHz vs 1306 MHz.
| Feature | HD Graphics 520 | GRID M10-0B |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 861 | 871+1% |
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 14 nm+ | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 640+233% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.3456 TFLOPS | 1.672 TFLOPS+384% |
| Boost Clock | 900 MHz | 1306 MHz+45% |
| ROPs | 3 | 16+433% |
| TMUs | 24 | 40+67% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | HD Graphics 520 | GRID M10-0B |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The HD Graphics 520 comes with 0 MB of VRAM, while the GRID M10-0B has 512 MB. The GRID M10-0B offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: System vs 64-bit.
| Feature | HD Graphics 520 | GRID M10-0B |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | Shared System RAM | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | Shared | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | System | 64-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The HD Graphics 520 draws 15W versus the GRID M10-0B's 225W — a 175% difference. The HD Graphics 520 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 1W (HD Graphics 520) vs 350W (GRID M10-0B). Power connectors: Integrated vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | HD Graphics 520 | GRID M10-0B |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 15W-93% | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 1W-100% | 350W |
| Power Connector | Integrated | PCIe-powered |
| Perf/Watt | 57.4+1372% | 3.9 |
Value Analysis
The HD Graphics 520 launched at $100 MSRP and currently averages $35, while the GRID M10-0B launched at $4000 and now averages $1000. The HD Graphics 520 costs 96.5% less ($965 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 24.6 (HD Graphics 520) vs 0.9 (GRID M10-0B) — the HD Graphics 520 offers 2633.3% better value. The GRID M10-0B is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2015).
| Feature | HD Graphics 520 | GRID M10-0B |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100-98% | $4000 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $35-97% | $1000 |
| Performance per Dollar | 24.6+2633% | 0.9 |
| Codename | Skylake GT2 | GM107 |
| Release | September 1 2015 | May 18 2016 |
| Ranking | #929 | #622 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.














