Intel UHD Graphics 620 vs NVIDIA GeForce 820M

Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 620 and NVIDIA GeForce 820M 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the Intel UHD Graphics 620

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 5 month(s) later
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• 3x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 45 Watt
• 32x more maximum memory size: 32 GB vs 1 GB
• 2.1x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1042 vs 490
• 2.1x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 241 vs 114
• Around 65% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 4592 vs 2789
• 3.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 27.062 vs 7.765
• Around 70% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 273.504 vs 161.305
• 2.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.777 vs 0.686
• Around 40% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 19.939 vs 14.257
• Around 40% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 31.881 vs 22.768
• Around 17% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1397 vs 1195
• Around 17% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1397 vs 1195

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 820M

• 2.7x more core clock speed: 810 MHz vs 300 MHz
• 4x more pipelines: 96 vs 24
• Around 65% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1447 vs 878
• Around 50% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3349 vs 2227
• Around 65% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1447 vs 878
• Around 50% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3349 vs 2227
• 13.7x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 847 vs 62

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 620
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 820M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1042 490
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	241 114
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	4592 2789
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	27.062 7.765
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	273.504 161.305
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.777 0.686
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	19.939 14.257
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	31.881 22.768
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1397 1195
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	878 1447
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2227 3349
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1397 1195
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	878 1447
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2227 3349
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	62 847

Compare specifications (specs)