Intel UHD Graphics 615 vs NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GSO
Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 615 and NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GSO 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 10 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- 954.5x more texture fill rate: 25.2 GTexel/s vs 26.4 billion / sec
- Around 53% better floating-point performance: 403.2 gflops vs 264 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 65 nm
- 21x lower typical power consumption: 5 Watt vs 105 Watt
- 42.7x more maximum memory size: 16 GB vs 384 MB
- 2.2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 732 vs 328
- Around 86% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 180 vs 97
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 7 November 2018 vs 28 April 2008 |
Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel/s vs 26.4 billion / sec |
Floating-point performance | 403.2 gflops vs 264 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 65 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt vs 105 Watt |
Maximum memory size | 16 GB vs 384 MB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 732 vs 328 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 180 vs 97 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GSO
- 4.6x more core clock speed: 1375 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 4x more pipelines: 96 vs 24
- Around 22% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2160 vs 1772
- Around 22% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2160 vs 1772
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1375 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Pipelines | 96 vs 24 |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2160 vs 1772 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2160 vs 1772 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 615
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GSO
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | Intel UHD Graphics 615 | NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GSO |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 732 | 328 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 180 | 97 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3229 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 18.422 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 221.42 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.277 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.269 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 18.909 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1256 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1720 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1772 | 2160 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1256 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1720 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1772 | 2160 |
Compare specifications (specs)
Intel UHD Graphics 615 | NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GSO | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Generation 9.5 | Tesla |
Code name | Kaby Lake GT2 | G92 |
Launch date | 7 November 2018 | 28 April 2008 |
Place in performance rating | 1411 | 1408 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Launch price (MSRP) | $49.99 | |
Price now | $49.99 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 13.43 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 1375 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 403.2 gflops | 264 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 65 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 | 96 |
Pixel fill rate | 3.150 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel/s | 26.4 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt | 105 Watt |
Transistor count | 189 million | 754 million |
CUDA cores | 96 | |
Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video, Dual Link DVIHDTV |
Audio input for HDMI | S / PDIF | |
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 | |
Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Length | 9" (22.9 cm) | |
SLI options | 2-way | |
Supplementary power connectors | 6-pin | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 10.0 |
OpenCL | 2.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | 384 MB |
Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 192 Bit |
Memory type | DDR3L / LPDDR3 | GDDR3 |
Shared memory | Yes | |
Memory bandwidth | 38.4 GB / s | |
Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
Quick Sync | ||
CUDA |