NVIDIA GeForce GT 620 vs Intel HD Graphics 4000

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 620 and Intel HD Graphics 4000 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 NVIDIA GeForce GT 620

• Around 8% higher core clock speed: 700 MHz vs 650 MHz
• 2.7x more texture fill rate: 11.2 billion / sec vs 4.2 GTexel / s
• 6x more pipelines: 96 vs 16
• 8x better floating-point performance: 268.8 gflops vs 33.6 gflops
• Around 10% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 383 vs 347
• 2.9x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 1571 vs 538
• Around 45% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 17.41 vs 12.009

Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 4000

• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 22 nm vs 40 nm
• Around 9% lower typical power consumption: 45 Watt vs 49 Watt
• Around 23% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 194 vs 158
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 8.712 vs 4.046
• Around 85% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 155.638 vs 83.907
• 2.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.931 vs 0.371
• Around 8% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 7.36 vs 6.791
• Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 754 vs 614
• Around 28% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1492 vs 1162
• Around 42% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2392 vs 1683
• Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 754 vs 614
• Around 28% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1492 vs 1162
• Around 42% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2392 vs 1683

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 620
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	383 347
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	158 194
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	1571 538
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4.046 8.712
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	83.907 155.638
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.371 0.931
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6.791 7.36
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	17.41 12.009
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	614 754
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1162 1492
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1683 2392
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	614 754
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1162 1492
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1683 2392

Compare specifications (specs)