HD Graphics 6000 vs Radeon R7 A10-8750
HD Graphics 6000
Popular choices:
Radeon R7 A10-8750
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R7 A10-8750
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The HD Graphics 6000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Radeon R7 A10-8750 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | HD Graphics 6000 | Radeon R7 A10-8750 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| 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 6000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the HD Graphics 6000 holds the technical lead. Priced at $10 (vs $30), it costs 67% less, resulting in a 206% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | HD Graphics 6000 | Radeon R7 A10-8750 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+206%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($10) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($30) |
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 6000 and Radeon R7 A10-8750
HD Graphics 6000
The HD Graphics 6000 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in September 5 2014. It features the Generation 8.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 300 MHz to 950 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 873 points.
Radeon R7 A10-8750
The Radeon R7 A10-8750 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in July 6 2016. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 800 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 856 points.
Graphics Performance
The HD Graphics 6000 scores 873 and the Radeon R7 A10-8750 reaches 856 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The HD Graphics 6000 is built on Generation 8.0 while the Radeon R7 A10-8750 uses GCN 1.0, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 384 (HD Graphics 6000) vs 512 (Radeon R7 A10-8750). Raw compute: 0.7296 TFLOPS (HD Graphics 6000) vs 0.8192 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 A10-8750).
| Feature | HD Graphics 6000 | Radeon R7 A10-8750 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 873+2% | 856 |
| Architecture | Generation 8.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 512+33% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7296 TFLOPS | 0.8192 TFLOPS+12% |
| ROPs | 6 | 16+167% |
| TMUs | 48+50% | 32 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | HD Graphics 6000 | Radeon R7 A10-8750 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The HD Graphics 6000 comes with 0 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon R7 A10-8750 has 512 MB. The Radeon R7 A10-8750 offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: System vs 128-bit.
| Feature | HD Graphics 6000 | Radeon R7 A10-8750 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | Shared System RAM | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | Shared | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | System | Unknown |
| Bus Width | System | 128-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The HD Graphics 6000 draws 15W versus the Radeon R7 A10-8750's 55W — a 114.3% difference. The HD Graphics 6000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 1W (HD Graphics 6000) vs 350W (Radeon R7 A10-8750). Power connectors: Integrated vs None.
| Feature | HD Graphics 6000 | Radeon R7 A10-8750 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 15W-73% | 55W |
| Recommended PSU | 1W-100% | 350W |
| Power Connector | Integrated | None |
| Perf/Watt | 58.2+273% | 15.6 |
Value Analysis
The HD Graphics 6000 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $10, while the Radeon R7 A10-8750 launched at $250 and now averages $30. The HD Graphics 6000 costs 66.7% less ($20 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 87.3 (HD Graphics 6000) vs 28.5 (Radeon R7 A10-8750) — the HD Graphics 6000 offers 206.3% better value. The Radeon R7 A10-8750 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2014).
| Feature | HD Graphics 6000 | Radeon R7 A10-8750 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $0-100% | $250 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-67% | $30 |
| Performance per Dollar | 87.3+206% | 28.5 |
| Codename | Broadwell GT3 | Cape Verde |
| Release | September 5 2014 | July 6 2016 |
| Ranking | #924 | #667 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on HD Graphics 6000 and Radeon R7 A10-8750
