NVIDIA Quadro K620M vs Intel HD Graphics 4400

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K620M 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 - 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), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K620M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 5 month(s) later
• 2.9x more core clock speed: 1029 MHz vs 350 MHz
• 3.9x more texture fill rate: 17.98 GTexel / s vs 4.6 GTexel / s
• 19.2x more pipelines: 384 vs 20
• 18.8x better floating-point performance: 863.2 gflops vs 46 gflops
• 2.2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1163 vs 524
• 2.8x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5974 vs 2143
• 3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 23.872 vs 7.844
• Around 7% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 165.904 vs 154.696
• 11x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 91.813 vs 8.335
• Around 58% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1291 vs 817
• Around 58% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1291 vs 817

Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 4400

• Around 2% higher boost clock speed: 1150 MHz vs 1124 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 22 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 50% lower typical power consumption: 20 Watt vs 30 Watt
• Around 76% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 277 vs 157
• Around 49% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1381 vs 927
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3044 vs 1349
• Around 49% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1381 vs 927
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3044 vs 1349

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K620M
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4400

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1163 524
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	157 277
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	5974 2143
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	23.872 7.844
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	165.904 154.696
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	91.813 8.335
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1291 817
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	927 1381
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1349 3044
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1291 817
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	927 1381
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1349 3044

Compare specifications (specs)