Intel UHD Graphics 617 vs NVIDIA GeForce 940M
Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 617 and NVIDIA GeForce 940M 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: 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), PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel UHD Graphics 617
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 7 month(s) later
- 893x more texture fill rate: 25.20 GTexel/s vs 28.22 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 2.2x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 33 Watt
- Around 49% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 231 vs 155
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 7 November 2018 vs 13 March 2015 |
Texture fill rate | 25.20 GTexel/s vs 28.22 GTexel / s |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 33 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 231 vs 155 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 940M
- 3.6x more core clock speed: 1072 MHz vs 300 MHz
- Around 12% higher boost clock speed: 1176 MHz vs 1050 MHz
- 16x more pipelines: 384 vs 24
- Around 80% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5926 vs 3290
- Around 62% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2132 vs 1313
- Around 62% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2132 vs 1313
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3065 vs 1461
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3065 vs 1461
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 vs 1633
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 vs 1633
- Around 29% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1125 vs 870
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1072 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1176 MHz vs 1050 MHz |
Pipelines | 384 vs 24 |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5926 vs 3290 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2132 vs 1313 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2132 vs 1313 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3065 vs 1461 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3065 vs 1461 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 vs 1633 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 vs 1633 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1125 vs 870 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 617
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 940M
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) |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
Name | Intel UHD Graphics 617 | NVIDIA GeForce 940M |
---|---|---|
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3290 | 5926 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1313 | 2132 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1313 | 2132 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1461 | 3065 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1461 | 3065 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1633 | 3357 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1633 | 3357 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 231 | 155 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 870 | 1125 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.98 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 168.449 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.307 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.837 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 101.399 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 506 |
Compare specifications (specs)
Intel UHD Graphics 617 | NVIDIA GeForce 940M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Generation 9.5 | Maxwell |
Code name | Amber Lake GT2 | GM108 |
Launch date | 7 November 2018 | 13 March 2015 |
Place in performance rating | 1225 | 1228 |
Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | 1176 MHz |
Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 1072 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 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 | 384 |
Pixel fill rate | 3.150 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 25.20 GTexel/s | 28.22 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 33 Watt |
Floating-point performance | 903.2 gflops | |
Transistor count | 1,870 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenCL | 2.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 6.4 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
Memory type | DDR3L / LPDDR3 | DDR3 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB / s | |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
CUDA | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GPU Boost | ||
Optimus |