Intel HD Graphics 4400 vs NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT
Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 4400 and NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT 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 4400
- Videocard is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 22 nm vs 55 nm
- 2.5x lower typical power consumption: 20 Watt vs 50 Watt
- 3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 524 vs 172
- 8.6x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 275 vs 32
- 12.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 7.844 vs 0.612
- 2.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 154.696 vs 56.838
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3044 vs 1505
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3044 vs 1505
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 3 September 2013 vs 29 July 2008 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm vs 55 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 20 Watt vs 50 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 524 vs 172 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 275 vs 32 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 7.844 vs 0.612 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 154.696 vs 56.838 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3044 vs 1505 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3044 vs 1505 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT
- 4x more core clock speed: 1400 MHz vs 350 MHz
- Around 91% higher texture fill rate: 8.8 billion / sec vs 4.6 GTexel / s
- Around 60% higher pipelines: 32 vs 20
- Around 95% better floating-point performance: 89.6 gflops vs 46 gflops
| Core clock speed | 1400 MHz vs 350 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 8.8 billion / sec vs 4.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 32 vs 20 |
| Floating-point performance | 89.6 gflops vs 46 gflops |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 4400
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | Intel HD Graphics 4400 | NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 524 | 172 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 275 | 32 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 2143 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 7.844 | 0.612 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 154.696 | 56.838 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.958 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 9.084 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 8.335 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 817 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1381 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3044 | 1505 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 817 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1381 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3044 | 1505 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 152 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel HD Graphics 4400 | NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 7.5 | Tesla |
| Code name | Haswell GT2 | G96C |
| Launch date | 3 September 2013 | 29 July 2008 |
| Place in performance rating | 1421 | 1666 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $85.99 | |
| Price now | $85.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 4.13 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1150 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 350 MHz | 1400 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 46 gflops | 89.6 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm | 55 nm |
| Pipelines | 20 | 32 |
| Texture fill rate | 4.6 GTexel / s | 8.8 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 20 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Transistor count | 392 million | 314 million |
| CUDA cores | 32 | |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video, Dual Link DVISingle Link DVI |
| Audio input for HDMI | S / PDIF | |
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Length | 6.875" (17.5 cm) | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 2.1 |
Memory |
||
| Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 / 512 MB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 (GDDR3) and 16.0 (DDR2) | |
| Memory clock speed | 800 (GDDR3) and 500 (DDR2) MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR3 | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
| CUDA | ||
| SLI | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare Intel HD Graphics 4400 with others
IntelHD Graphics 4400 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 555M
IntelHD Graphics 4400 vs
AMDRadeon HD 7560D
IntelHD Graphics 4400 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8350G
IntelHD Graphics 4400 vs
AMDFirePro S4000X
IntelHD Graphics 4400 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K620M
IntelHD Graphics 4400 vs
NVIDIAGRID M40
