NVIDIA GeForce GT 520 vs Intel HD Graphics 3000
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 520 and Intel HD Graphics 3000 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 NVIDIA GeForce GT 520
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 month(s) later
- Around 91% higher core clock speed: 1620 MHz vs 850 MHz
- 3.8x more texture fill rate: 6.5 billion / sec vs 1.7 GTexel / s
- 4x more pipelines: 48 vs 12
- 7.6x better floating-point performance: 155.52 gflops vs 20.4 gflops
- Around 21% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 312 vs 258
- 3.9x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 135 vs 35
- 14.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1455 vs 101
- 14.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1455 vs 101
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 13 April 2011 vs 1 February 2011 |
| Core clock speed | 1620 MHz vs 850 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 6.5 billion / sec vs 1.7 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 48 vs 12 |
| Floating-point performance | 155.52 gflops vs 20.4 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 312 vs 258 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 135 vs 35 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1455 vs 101 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1455 vs 101 |
Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 3000
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 32 nm vs 40 nm
- Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1137 vs 903
- Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1137 vs 903
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Manufacturing process technology | 32 nm vs 40 nm |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1137 vs 903 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1137 vs 903 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 520
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 3000
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GT 520 | Intel HD Graphics 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 312 | 258 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 135 | 35 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 1274 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 2.597 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 76.214 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.239 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 5.862 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 4.574 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 545 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 903 | 1137 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1455 | 101 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 545 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 903 | 1137 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1455 | 101 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GT 520 | Intel HD Graphics 3000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | Generation 6.0 |
| Code name | GF119 | Sandy Bridge GT2 |
| Launch date | 13 April 2011 | 1 February 2011 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $59 | |
| Place in performance rating | 1597 | 1598 |
| Price now | $59.99 | |
| Type | Desktop | Laptop |
| Value for money (0-100) | 7.58 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 1620 MHz | 850 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 48 | |
| Floating-point performance | 155.52 gflops | 20.4 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 32 nm |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 102 °C | |
| Pipelines | 48 | 12 |
| Texture fill rate | 6.5 billion / sec | 1.7 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 29 Watt | |
| Transistor count | 292 million | 995 million |
| Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA, Dual Link DVI-IHDMIVGA (optional) | No outputs |
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | 16x PCI-E 2.0 | |
| Height | 2.7" (6.9 cm) | |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Length | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 10.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.2 | 3.1 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB (DDR3) | |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 / 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz (DDR3) | |
| Memory type | DDR3 | |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GT 520 with others
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 230M
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520 vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 380 LP
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520 vs
IntelHD Graphics 3000
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 620 OEM
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8180
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520 vs
NVIDIAGRID K340
