Intel UHD Graphics 610 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 440
Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 610 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 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 UHD Graphics 610
- Videocard is newer: launch date 7 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 40 nm
- 4.3x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 65 Watt
- Around 2% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 2687 vs 2624
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 3 April 2018 vs 1 February 2011 |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 40 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 65 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2687 vs 2624 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 440
- 5.4x more core clock speed: 1620 MHz vs 300 MHz
- Around 9% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 772 vs 709
- Around 33% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 232 vs 175
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1208 vs 1071
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1208 vs 1071
- Around 65% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2053 vs 1241
- Around 65% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2053 vs 1241
- Around 93% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3275 vs 1699
- Around 93% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3275 vs 1699
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1620 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 772 vs 709 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 232 vs 175 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1208 vs 1071 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1208 vs 1071 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2053 vs 1241 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2053 vs 1241 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3275 vs 1699 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3275 vs 1699 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 610
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 440
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 UHD Graphics 610 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 709 | 772 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 175 | 232 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2687 | 2624 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1071 | 1208 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1071 | 1208 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1241 | 2053 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1241 | 2053 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1699 | 3275 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1699 | 3275 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 6.139 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 171.053 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.65 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 9.729 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 19.871 |
Compare specifications (specs)
Intel UHD Graphics 610 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Generation 9.5 | Fermi |
Code name | Coffee Lake GT1 | GF108 |
Launch date | 3 April 2018 | 1 February 2011 |
Place in performance rating | 1340 | 1337 |
Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Launch price (MSRP) | $79 | |
Price now | $69.99 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 14.03 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 1620 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
Transistor count | 189 million | 585 million |
CUDA cores | 96 | |
Floating-point performance | 311.04 gflops | |
Maximum GPU temperature | 98 °C | |
Pipelines | 96 | |
Texture fill rate | 13.0 billion / sec | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA, HDMIVGADual Link DVI |
Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
HDMI | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 | |
Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Length | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.2 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB GDDR5 or 1 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 28.8 (DDR3) – 51.2 (GDDR5) | |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | |
Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz (GDDR5) or 900 MHz (DDR3) | |
Memory type | DDR3 | |
Standard memory config per GPU | 1 GB GDDR5 or 2 GB | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
CUDA |