NVIDIA GeForce GT 820M vs Intel HD Graphics 4400

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 820M and Intel HD Graphics 4400 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 820M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 month(s) later
• 2.2x more core clock speed: 775 MHz vs 350 MHz
• 2.7x more texture fill rate: 12.4 GTexel / s vs 4.6 GTexel / s
• 4.8x more pipelines: 96 vs 20
• 6.5x better floating-point performance: 297.6 gflops vs 46 gflops
• Around 33% lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 20 Watt
• Around 5% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 551 vs 524
• Around 18% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 2530 vs 2143
• Around 4% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 161.29 vs 154.696
• Around 31% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 11.858 vs 9.084
• 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 17.753 vs 8.335
• Around 55% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1263 vs 817
• Around 80% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2479 vs 1381
• Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3327 vs 3044
• Around 55% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1263 vs 817
• Around 80% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2479 vs 1381
• Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3327 vs 3044

Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 4400

• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 22 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 91% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 275 vs 144
• 2.9x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 7.844 vs 2.692
• Around 74% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.958 vs 0.55

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 820M
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4400

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	551 524
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	144 275
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	2530 2143
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.692 7.844
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	161.29 154.696
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.55 0.958
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	11.858 9.084
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	17.753 8.335
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1263 817
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2479 1381
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3327 3044
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1263 817
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2479 1381
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3327 3044

Compare specifications (specs)