Key Differences
In short — Radeon R9 280 outperforms HD Graphics 620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Radeon R9 280 is 910 days older than HD Graphics 620.
Advantages of Intel HD Graphics 620
- Consumes up to 92% less energy than AMD Radeon R9 280 - 15 vs 200 Watts
Advantages of AMD Radeon R9 280
- Performs up to 15% better in Dead Space than HD Graphics 620 - 47 vs 41 FPS
Dead Space
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
HD Graphics 620
Integrated • Aug 30th, 2016
Radeon R9 280
Desktop • Mar 4th, 2014
Theoretical Performance
HD Graphics 620
Integrated • Aug 30th, 2016
Pixel Fillrate
3 GPixel/s
10.046885465505694%
Texel Fillrate
24 GTexel/s
22.966507177033492%
Radeon R9 280
Desktop • Mar 4th, 2014
Pixel Fillrate
29.86 GPixel/s
100%
Texel Fillrate
104.5 GTexel/s
100%
Intel HD Graphics 620 | vs | AMD Radeon R9 280 |
|---|---|---|
Aug 30th, 2016 | Release Date | Mar 4th, 2014 |
| HD Graphics-M | Generation | Volcanic Islands |
| Not Available | MSRP | $279 |
| Portable Device Dependent | Outputs | 1x DVI, 2x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| None | Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
Integrated | Segment | Desktop |
| System-Shared | Memory | 3 GB |
| System-Shared | Type | GDDR5 |
| System-Shared | Bus | 384-bit |
| System-Shared | Bandwidth | 240 GB/s |
| 300 MHz | Base Clock Speed | 827 MHz |
1000 MHz | Boost Clock Speed | 933 MHz |
| System-Shared | Memory Clock Speed | 1250 MHz |
