Intel HD Graphics 6000 vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000D
Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 6000 and NVIDIA Quadro 2000D 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, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (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 6000
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 40 nm
- 4.1x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 62 Watt
Launch date | 5 September 2014 vs 5 October 2011 |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 40 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 62 Watt |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D
- 2.1x more core clock speed: 625 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 4x more pipelines: 192 vs 48
- Around 12% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 976 vs 874
- Around 20% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 328 vs 273
- Around 11% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3925 vs 3548
- Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1453 vs 1225
- Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1453 vs 1225
- 2.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3447 vs 1363
- 2.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3447 vs 1363
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 vs 3259
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 vs 3259
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 625 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Pipelines | 192 vs 48 |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 976 vs 874 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 328 vs 273 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3925 vs 3548 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1453 vs 1225 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1453 vs 1225 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3447 vs 1363 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3447 vs 1363 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 vs 3259 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 vs 3259 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 6000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 2000D
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | Intel HD Graphics 6000 | NVIDIA Quadro 2000D |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 874 | 976 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 273 | 328 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3548 | 3925 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1225 | 1453 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1225 | 1453 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1363 | 3447 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1363 | 3447 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3259 | 3353 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3259 | 3353 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 11.122 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 320.57 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.67 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 31.168 |
Compare specifications (specs)
Intel HD Graphics 6000 | NVIDIA Quadro 2000D | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Generation 8.0 | Fermi |
Code name | Broadwell GT3 | GF106 |
Launch date | 5 September 2014 | 5 October 2011 |
Place in performance rating | 1125 | 1127 |
Type | Laptop | Workstation |
Launch price (MSRP) | $599 | |
Price now | $209 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 7.27 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 625 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 48 | 192 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 62 Watt |
Transistor count | 189 million | 1,170 million |
Floating-point performance | 480.0 gflops | |
Texture fill rate | 20 GTexel / s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x1 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Length | 178 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Shared memory | 1 | |
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 41.6 GB / s | |
Memory clock speed | 2600 MHz | |
Memory type | GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
Quick Sync |