Intel HD Graphics 500 vs NVIDIA Quadro 4000

Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 500 and NVIDIA Quadro 4000 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 500

• Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 9 month(s) later
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 40 nm
• 23.7x lower typical power consumption: 6 Watt vs 142 Watt
• 4x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 2 GB

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 4000

• 2.4x more core clock speed: 475 MHz vs 200 MHz
• Around 69% higher texture fill rate: 15.2 GTexel / s vs 9 GTexel / s
• 21.3x more pipelines: 256 vs 12
• 3.4x better floating-point performance: 486.4 gflops vs 144.0 gflops
• 4.9x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1476 vs 300
• 4.8x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 382 vs 80
• 5.5x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5013 vs 911
• 3.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 13.345 vs 3.525
• 8.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 306.122 vs 35.665
• 7.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.552 vs 0.215
• 6.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 20.453 vs 2.987
• 9.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 39.651 vs 4.154
• 4.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2079 vs 488
• 6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3472 vs 579
• 3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3350 vs 1122
• 4.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2079 vs 488
• 6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3472 vs 579
• 3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3350 vs 1122

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 500
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 4000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	300 1476
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	80 382
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	911 5013
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.525 13.345
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	35.665 306.122
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.215 1.552
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.987 20.453
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4.154 39.651
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	488 2079
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	579 3472
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1122 3350
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	488 2079
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	579 3472
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1122 3350

Compare specifications (specs)