Intel HD Graphics 505 vs NVIDIA GRID K1
Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 505 and NVIDIA GRID K1 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: Geekbench - OpenCL, PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 505
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 13x lower typical power consumption: 10 Watt vs 130 Watt
- 5.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1635 vs 319
- 5.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1635 vs 319
- 2.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 956 vs 354
- 2.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 956 vs 354
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 1 September 2015 vs 18 March 2013 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt vs 130 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1635 vs 319 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1635 vs 319 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 956 vs 354 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 956 vs 354 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GRID K1
- 3.4x more core clock speed: 850 MHz vs 250 MHz
- 28.7x more texture fill rate: 4x 13.6 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 14.4 GTexel / s
- 42.7x more pipelines: 4x 192 vs 18
- 5.7x better floating-point performance: 4x 326.4 gflops vs 230.4 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4x 4 GB vs 8 GB
- Around 53% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 1976 vs 1292
- 2.8x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 259 vs 94
- Around 80% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 651 vs 361
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1237 vs 470
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1237 vs 470
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 850 MHz vs 250 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 4x 13.6 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 14.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 4x 192 vs 18 |
| Floating-point performance | 4x 326.4 gflops vs 230.4 gflops |
| Maximum memory size | 4x 4 GB vs 8 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 1976 vs 1292 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 259 vs 94 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 651 vs 361 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1237 vs 470 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1237 vs 470 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 505
GPU 2: NVIDIA GRID K1
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | Intel HD Graphics 505 | NVIDIA GRID K1 |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 1292 | 1976 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 94 | 259 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 361 | 651 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1635 | 319 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1635 | 319 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 956 | 354 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 956 | 354 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 470 | 1237 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 470 | 1237 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 4.591 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 169.864 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.336 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 8.734 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 10.43 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel HD Graphics 505 | NVIDIA GRID K1 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 | Kepler |
| Code name | Apollo Lake GT1 | GK107 |
| Launch date | 1 September 2015 | 18 March 2013 |
| Place in performance rating | 1532 | 1534 |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $4,140 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 800 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 250 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 230.4 gflops | 4x 326.4 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 18 | 4x 192 |
| Texture fill rate | 14.4 GTexel / s | 4x 13.6 GTexel / s billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt | 130 Watt |
| Transistor count | 189 million | 1,270 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4x 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 4x 128 Bit |
| Memory type | DDR3L / LPDDR3 / LPDDR4 | DDR3 |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
| Memory bandwidth | 4x 28.51 GB / s | |
| Memory clock speed | 1782 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
