Intel UHD Graphics 620 vs NVIDIA Quadro 1000M

Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 620 and NVIDIA Quadro 1000M 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 6 year(s) 7 month(s) later
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 40 nm
• 3x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 45 Watt
• 16x more maximum memory size: 32 GB vs 2 GB
• Around 86% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1042 vs 560
• Around 22% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 241 vs 197
• 2.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 4592 vs 2131
• 5.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 27.062 vs 5.218
• Around 32% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 273.504 vs 207.789
• 3.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.777 vs 0.52
• Around 96% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 19.939 vs 10.149
• Around 35% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 31.881 vs 23.677
• Around 56% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1397 vs 894
• Around 56% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1397 vs 894

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 1000M

• 2.3x more core clock speed: 700 MHz vs 300 MHz
• 4x more pipelines: 96 vs 24
• Around 86% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1633 vs 878
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2327 vs 2227
• Around 86% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1633 vs 878
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2327 vs 2227

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 620
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 1000M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1042 560
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	241 197
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	4592 2131
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	27.062 5.218
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	273.504 207.789
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.777 0.52
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	19.939 10.149
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	31.881 23.677
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1397 894
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	878 1633
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2227 2327
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1397 894
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	878 1633
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2227 2327

Compare specifications (specs)