Intel HD Graphics 6000 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2000M
Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 6000 and NVIDIA Quadro K2000M 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) 3 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 3.7x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 55 Watt
- Around 8% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 276 vs 255
- Around 24% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3554 vs 2857
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 5 September 2014 vs 1 June 2012 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 55 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 276 vs 255 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3554 vs 2857 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K2000M
- 2.5x more core clock speed: 745 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 8x more pipelines: 384 vs 48
- Around 17% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1012 vs 865
- Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1726 vs 1225
- Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1726 vs 1225
- Around 62% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2207 vs 1363
- Around 62% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2207 vs 1363
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3351 vs 3259
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3351 vs 3259
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 745 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Pipelines | 384 vs 48 |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1012 vs 865 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1726 vs 1225 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1726 vs 1225 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2207 vs 1363 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2207 vs 1363 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3351 vs 3259 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 vs 3259 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 6000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2000M
| 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 K2000M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 865 | 1012 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 276 | 255 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3554 | 2857 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1225 | 1726 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1225 | 1726 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1363 | 2207 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1363 | 2207 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3259 | 3351 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3259 | 3351 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.142 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 262.321 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.741 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 16.571 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 18.406 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel HD Graphics 6000 | NVIDIA Quadro K2000M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 8.0 | Kepler |
| Code name | Broadwell GT3 | GK107 |
| Launch date | 5 September 2014 | 1 June 2012 |
| Place in performance rating | 1119 | 1252 |
| Type | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $265.27 | |
| Price now | $149.95 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 8.53 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 745 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 48 | 384 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 55 Watt |
| Transistor count | 189 million | 1,270 million |
| Floating-point performance | 572.2 gflops | |
| Texture fill rate | 23.84 GTexel / s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x1 | MXM-A (3.0) |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Shared memory | 1 | 0 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.8 GB / s | |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | |
| Memory type | DDR3 | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare Intel HD Graphics 6000 with others
IntelHD Graphics 6000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 580 Rev. 2
IntelHD Graphics 6000 vs
NVIDIAQuadro 2000D
IntelHD Graphics 6000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 760M
IntelHD Graphics 6000 vs
AMDRadeon R5 M315
IntelHD Graphics 6000 vs
AMDRadeon R5 330 OEM
IntelHD Graphics 6000 vs
AMDFirePro W5130M
