Intel HD Graphics 505 vs NVIDIA GeForce 610M
Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 505 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: 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 3 year(s) 9 month(s) later
- Around 79% better floating-point performance: 230.4 gflops vs 129.02 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 40 nm
- Around 20% lower typical power consumption: 10 Watt vs 12 Watt
- 8x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 1 GB
- Around 24% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 361 vs 292
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 1 September 2015 vs 1 December 2011 |
| Floating-point performance | 230.4 gflops vs 129.02 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt vs 12 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 1 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 361 vs 292 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 610M
- 2.7x more core clock speed: 672 MHz vs 250 MHz
- Around 13% higher boost clock speed: 900 MHz vs 800 MHz
- 2.7x more pipelines: 48 vs 18
- Around 8% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 1396 vs 1292
- Around 20% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 113 vs 94
- Around 74% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2848 vs 1635
- Around 74% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2848 vs 1635
- Around 68% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1602 vs 956
- Around 68% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1602 vs 956
- Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 664 vs 470
- Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 664 vs 470
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 672 MHz vs 250 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 900 MHz vs 800 MHz |
| Pipelines | 48 vs 18 |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 1396 vs 1292 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 113 vs 94 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2848 vs 1635 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2848 vs 1635 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1602 vs 956 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1602 vs 956 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 664 vs 470 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 664 vs 470 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 505
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 610M
| 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 GeForce 610M |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 1292 | 1396 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 94 | 113 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 361 | 292 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1635 | 2848 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1635 | 2848 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 956 | 1602 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 956 | 1602 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 470 | 664 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 470 | 664 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 2.747 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 104.498 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.27 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 5.832 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 9.69 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel HD Graphics 505 | NVIDIA GeForce 610M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 | Fermi |
| Code name | Apollo Lake GT1 | GF108 |
| Launch date | 1 September 2015 | 1 December 2011 |
| Place in performance rating | 1532 | 1535 |
| Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 800 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 250 MHz | 672 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 230.4 gflops | 129.02 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 18 | 48 |
| Texture fill rate | 14.4 GTexel / s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt | 12 Watt |
| Transistor count | 189 million | 585 million |
| CUDA cores | 48 | |
| Video decoders | H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Bus support | PCI Express 2.0 | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 API |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 64bit |
| Memory type | DDR3L / LPDDR3 / LPDDR4 | DDR3 |
| Shared memory | 1 | 0 |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
| CUDA | ||
| Optimus | ||
