Intel UHD Graphics 615 vs NVIDIA GeForce 310 OEM
Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 615 and NVIDIA GeForce 310 OEM 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel UHD Graphics 615
- Videocard is newer: launch date 8 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- 5350.3x more texture fill rate: 25.2 GTexel/s vs 4.71 GTexel / s
- Around 50% higher pipelines: 24 vs 16
- 9x better floating-point performance: 403.2 gflops vs 44.86 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 40 nm
- 6.2x lower typical power consumption: 5 Watt vs 31 Watt
- 32x more maximum memory size: 16 GB vs 512 MB
- 6.2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 740 vs 120
- 4.3x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 185 vs 43
- Around 19% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3239 vs 2724
- Around 68% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1772 vs 1052
- Around 68% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1772 vs 1052
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 7 November 2018 vs 27 November 2009 |
| Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel/s vs 4.71 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 24 vs 16 |
| Floating-point performance | 403.2 gflops vs 44.86 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt vs 31 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 16 GB vs 512 MB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 740 vs 120 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 185 vs 43 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3239 vs 2724 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1772 vs 1052 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1772 vs 1052 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 310 OEM
- Around 96% higher core clock speed: 589 MHz vs 300 MHz
| Core clock speed | 589 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 615
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 310 OEM
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | Intel UHD Graphics 615 | NVIDIA GeForce 310 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 740 | 120 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 185 | 43 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3239 | 2724 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 18.583 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 221.42 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.34 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.269 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 23.383 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1256 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1720 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1772 | 1052 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1256 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1720 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1772 | 1052 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel UHD Graphics 615 | NVIDIA GeForce 310 OEM | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.5 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | Kaby Lake GT2 | GT218 |
| Launch date | 7 November 2018 | 27 November 2009 |
| Place in performance rating | 1390 | 1639 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 589 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 403.2 gflops | 44.86 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 100.8 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 806.4 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 403.2 GFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 24 | 16 |
| Pixel fill rate | 3.150 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel/s | 4.71 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt | 31 Watt |
| Transistor count | 189 million | 260 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort, 1x VGA |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 168 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 10.1 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory type | DDR3L / LPDDR3 | DDR2 |
| Shared memory | Yes | |
| Memory bandwidth | 5.33 GB / s | |
| Memory clock speed | 666 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare Intel UHD Graphics 615 with others
IntelUHD Graphics 615 vs
ATIRadeon HD 3870
IntelUHD Graphics 615 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9600 GSO
IntelUHD Graphics 615 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 260
IntelUHD Graphics 615 vs
AMDRadeon R7 M340
IntelUHD Graphics 615 vs
AMDRadeon R5 M320
IntelUHD Graphics 615 vs
IntelHD Graphics 520
