Intel HD Graphics 4000 vs NVIDIA GeForce 610M

Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 4000 and NVIDIA GeForce 610M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 4000

• Videocard is newer: launch date 5 month(s) later
• Around 17% higher boost clock speed: 1050 MHz vs 900 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 22 nm vs 40 nm
• Around 19% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 347 vs 292
• Around 72% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 194 vs 113
• 3.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 8.712 vs 2.747
• Around 49% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 155.638 vs 104.498
• 3.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.931 vs 0.27
• Around 26% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 7.36 vs 5.832
• Around 24% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 12.009 vs 9.69
• Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 754 vs 664
• Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 754 vs 664

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 610M

• Around 3% higher core clock speed: 672 MHz vs 650 MHz
• 3x more pipelines: 48 vs 16
• 3.8x better floating-point performance: 129.02 gflops vs 33.6 gflops
• 3.8x lower typical power consumption: 12 Watt vs 45 Watt
• 2.6x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 1396 vs 538
• Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1602 vs 1492
• Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2848 vs 2392
• Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1602 vs 1492
• Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2848 vs 2392

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 4000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 610M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	347 292
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	194 113
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	538 1396
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8.712 2.747
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	155.638 104.498
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.931 0.27
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	7.36 5.832
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12.009 9.69
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	754 664
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1492 1602
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2392 2848
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	754 664
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1492 1602
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2392 2848

Compare specifications (specs)