Intel HD Graphics 520 vs NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT
Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 520 and NVIDIA GeForce 8600 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 520
- Videocard is newer: launch date 8 year(s) 4 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 80 nm
- 3.1x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 47 Watt
- 64x more maximum memory size: 32 GB vs 512 MB
- 6.6x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 864 vs 131
- 5x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 209 vs 42
- 3.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1462 vs 449
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3337 vs 1397
- 3.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1462 vs 449
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3337 vs 1397
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 1 September 2015 vs 17 April 2007 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 80 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 47 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB vs 512 MB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 864 vs 131 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 209 vs 42 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1462 vs 449 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 vs 1397 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1462 vs 449 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 vs 1397 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT
- Around 80% higher core clock speed: 540 MHz vs 300 MHz
- Around 33% higher pipelines: 32 vs 24
| Core clock speed | 540 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Pipelines | 32 vs 24 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 520
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | Intel HD Graphics 520 | NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 864 | 131 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 209 | 42 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3993 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 21.852 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 143.083 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.243 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.958 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 28.182 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 951 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1462 | 449 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 | 1397 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 951 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1462 | 449 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 | 1397 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 326 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel HD Graphics 520 | NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 | Tesla |
| Code name | Skylake GT2 | G84 |
| Launch date | 1 September 2015 | 17 April 2007 |
| Place in performance rating | 1381 | 1621 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $159 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 540 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 80 nm |
| Pipelines | 24 | 32 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 47 Watt |
| Transistor count | 189 million | 289 million |
| Floating-point performance | 76.16 gflops | |
| Texture fill rate | 8.6 billion / sec | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Length | 170 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory type | DDR3L / LPDDR3 / DDR4 | GDDR3 |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
| Memory bandwidth | 22.4 GB / s | |
| Memory clock speed | 700 MHz | |
| Standard memory config per GPU | 256 MB | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
| SLI | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare Intel HD Graphics 520 with others
IntelHD Graphics 520 vs
ATIMobility Radeon 7500
IntelHD Graphics 520 vs
IntelHD Graphics
IntelHD Graphics 520 vs
AMDRadeon R7 M340
IntelHD Graphics 520 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 910M
IntelHD Graphics 520 vs
IntelUHD Graphics 620
IntelHD Graphics 520 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8370D IGP
