NVIDIA Quadro M2000M vs Intel HD Graphics 5600
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M2000M and Intel HD Graphics 5600 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 Quadro M2000M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- 3.4x more core clock speed: 1029 MHz vs 300 MHz
- Around 5% higher boost clock speed: 1098 MHz vs 1050 MHz
- 26.7x more pipelines: 640 vs 24
- Around 53% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3466 vs 2264
- 2.8x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 8148 vs 2872
- 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 1598
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 vs 3330
- 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 1598
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 vs 3330
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 3 December 2015 vs 5 September 2014 |
Core clock speed | 1029 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1098 MHz vs 1050 MHz |
Pipelines | 640 vs 24 |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3466 vs 2264 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8148 vs 2872 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 vs 1598 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 vs 3330 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 vs 1598 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 vs 3330 |
Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 5600
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 3.7x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 55 Watt
- Around 36% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 463 vs 340
Specifications (specs) | |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 55 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 463 vs 340 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M2000M
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 5600
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA Quadro M2000M | Intel HD Graphics 5600 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3466 | 2264 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 340 | 463 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8148 | 2872 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 47.281 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 782.113 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.5 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.048 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 171.268 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4920 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 1598 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3330 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4920 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 1598 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3330 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA Quadro M2000M | Intel HD Graphics 5600 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Maxwell | Generation 8.0 |
Code name | GM107 | Broadwell GT2 |
Launch date | 3 December 2015 | 5 September 2014 |
Place in performance rating | 701 | 746 |
Type | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1098 MHz | 1050 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1029 MHz | 300 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 1,405 gflops | |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
Pipelines | 640 | 24 |
Texture fill rate | 43.92 GTexel / s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt | 15 Watt |
Transistor count | 1,870 million | 1,300 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Display Port | 1.2 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x1 |
Laptop size | large | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_1) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 5.0 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 80 GB / s | |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 / 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | |
Memory type | GDDR5 | |
Shared memory | 0 | 1 |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision Pro | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus | ||
Quick Sync |