Intel UHD Graphics 750 vs NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile

Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 750 and NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, API support, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, Memory. 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), 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, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the Intel UHD Graphics 750

• Videocard is newer: launch date 7 year(s) 9 month(s) later
• 475.8x more texture fill rate: 20.80 GTexel/s vs 43.72 GTexel / s
• 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
• Around 10% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 351 vs 318
• Around 22% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3219 vs 2645
• 3.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 11068 vs 3359
• Around 22% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3219 vs 2645
• 3.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 11068 vs 3359

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile

• 3.6x more core clock speed: 1093 MHz vs 300 MHz
• 2.5x more pipelines: 640 vs 256
• Around 88% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3239 vs 1726
• Around 63% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 10582 vs 6483
• Around 50% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 52.821 vs 35.179
• Around 46% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 793.297 vs 543.594
• Around 82% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.631 vs 1.995
• Around 67% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 48.966 vs 29.322
• Around 70% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4941 vs 2899
• Around 70% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4941 vs 2899

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 750
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1726 3239
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	351 318
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	6483 10582
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	35.179 52.821
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	543.594 793.297
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.995 3.631
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	29.322 48.966
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2899 4941
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3219 2645
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	11068 3359
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2899 4941
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3219 2645
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	11068 3359

Compare specifications (specs)