Intel HD Graphics 4600 vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800
Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 4600 and NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800 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 4600
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 22 nm vs 55 nm
- 2.4x lower typical power consumption: 45 Watt vs 108 Watt
- 5.4x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 315 vs 58
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 3 June 2013 vs 30 March 2009 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm vs 55 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt vs 108 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 315 vs 58 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800
- Around 50% higher core clock speed: 600 MHz vs 400 MHz
- 7.7x more texture fill rate: 38.4 GTexel / s vs 5 GTexel / s
- 9.6x more pipelines: 192 vs 20
- 9.2x better floating-point performance: 462.3 gflops vs 50 gflops
- Around 27% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 799 vs 629
- 4.1x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 13337 vs 3232
- Around 16% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3258 vs 2808
- Around 16% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3258 vs 2808
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz vs 400 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 38.4 GTexel / s vs 5 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 192 vs 20 |
| Floating-point performance | 462.3 gflops vs 50 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 799 vs 629 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 13337 vs 3232 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3258 vs 2808 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3258 vs 2808 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 4600
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | Intel HD Graphics 4600 | NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 629 | 799 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 315 | 58 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3232 | 13337 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.844 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 171.17 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.115 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 10.385 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 12.361 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 988 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1702 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2808 | 3258 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 988 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1702 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2808 | 3258 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 194 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel HD Graphics 4600 | NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 7.5 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | Haswell GT2 | GT200B |
| Launch date | 3 June 2013 | 30 March 2009 |
| Place in performance rating | 1354 | 1355 |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $799 | |
| Price now | $109.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 9.89 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1250 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 400 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 50 gflops | 462.3 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm | 55 nm |
| Pipelines | 20 | 192 |
| Texture fill rate | 5 GTexel / s | 38.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt | 108 Watt |
| Transistor count | 392 million | 1,400 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 198 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 3.3 |
Memory |
||
| Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB / s | |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR3 | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare Intel HD Graphics 4600 with others
IntelHD Graphics 4600 vs
ATIMobility Radeon 7500
IntelHD Graphics 4600 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 8800 GT
IntelHD Graphics 4600 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 7050 + nForce 610i
IntelHD Graphics 4600 vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 3800
IntelHD Graphics 4600 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8400 IGP
IntelHD Graphics 4600 vs
AMDRadeon RX Vega 8
