Intel HD Graphics 530 vs Intel HD Graphics 630 Comparison

The Verdict

The data places Intel HD Graphics 630 clearly ahead of Intel HD Graphics 530. Across three recorded benchmark tests, HD Graphics 630 wins all three, with the most dramatic gap appearing in Vulkan performance, where it leads by 148.9%. The average benchmark score tells the same story: HD Graphics 630 averages 4075, while HD Graphics 530 averages 3332, a difference that places them in different performance tiers.

The percentile rankings reinforce this split. HD Graphics 630 sits at the 24th percentile among all GPUs, while HD Graphics 530 sits at the 20th percentile. That four-point gap may sound modest, but it reflects a consistently higher baseline across the benchmark suite.

For users choosing between these two integrated graphics solutions, the verdict depends on workload. If the task involves Vulkan-based applications, HD Graphics 630 is the only rational choice, as its 3540 Vulkan score dwarfs the 1422 posted by HD Graphics 530. For OpenCL and Metal workloads, the gap narrows considerably: HD Graphics 630 leads by just 1% in OpenCL and 1.5% in Metal. Users who primarily run legacy OpenCL or Metal workloads may not notice a meaningful difference between the two.

Both parts are end-of-life products, so neither represents a forward-looking investment. The database shows HD Graphics 630 as the stronger performer in every recorded test, with the Vulkan result being the decisive differentiator. Anyone who needs modern graphics API support should favor HD Graphics 630 without hesitation.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share Intel's GT2 die configuration with 192 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 3 raster operation pipelines. The core counts are identical, and both use a Ring Bus interface with system-shared memory. The differences lie in the underlying architecture generation and manufacturing process.

HD Graphics 630 is built on Kaby Lake GT2, which uses Intel's Generation 9.5 architecture. HD Graphics 530 uses Skylake GT2, based on Generation 9.0. This half-generation step introduces refinements in the graphics pipeline, though the fundamental design remains similar. The process node also differs: HD Graphics 630 uses 14 nm++, while HD Graphics 530 uses 14 nm+. The extra plus sign represents a matured manufacturing process, which typically enables higher clock speeds at the same power envelope.

Clock speeds confirm this advantage. Both GPUs have a 350 MHz base clock, but the boost clock differs: HD Graphics 630 reaches 1000 MHz, while HD Graphics 530 tops out at 950 MHz. That 50 MHz boost advantage translates directly into higher theoretical throughput. HD Graphics 630 delivers 384.0 GFLOPS of FP32 compute and 768.0 GFLOPS of FP16 compute (2:1 ratio), while HD Graphics 530 delivers 364.8 GFLOPS FP32 and 729.6 GFLOPS FP16. The pixel rate follows the same pattern: 3.000 GPixel/s for HD Graphics 630 versus 2.850 GPixel/s for HD Graphics 530. Texture rate also favors the newer part at 24.00 GTexel/s versus 22.80 GTexel/s.

The die size for HD Graphics 530 is recorded as 123 mm², while no die size is listed for HD Graphics 630. Both parts carry a 15 W TDP, both are integrated graphics processors (IGP), and both have motherboard-dependent display outputs. Memory configurations are identical: system shared, with bandwidth dependent on the host system.

API support is the same on paper. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The Vulkan benchmark results, however, suggest that HD Graphics 630 executes that API far more effectively in practice.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark suite covers three tests: Geekbench Metal, Geekbench OpenCL, and Geekbench Vulkan. HD Graphics 630 wins all three, but the margins vary wildly.

In Geekbench Metal, HD Graphics 630 scores 5099 against 5025 for HD Graphics 530. The delta is 1.5%, a narrow victory that falls within the range of run-to-run variance. For Metal-focused applications, these two GPUs are effectively interchangeable.

Geekbench OpenCL shows a similar pattern. HD Graphics 630 scores 3587, while HD Graphics 530 scores 3550. The delta is 1%, again a slim margin. The compute capabilities of both GPUs are closely matched, which makes sense given their identical shading unit and TMU counts.

Geekbench Vulkan is where the comparison transforms. HD Graphics 630 scores 3540, while HD Graphics 530 scores 1422. The delta is a staggering 148.9%. This is not a marginal improvement; it is a fundamental difference in Vulkan execution efficiency. The architecture refinements in Generation 9.5, combined with the higher boost clock, produce a result that is nearly 2.5 times faster in this specific API. This single result drives most of the average score gap between the two parts.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context for these scores. HD Graphics 630's average score of 4075 places it within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB (4093), 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M (4033), 1.5% ahead of the AMD FirePro M4150 (4013), and 1.8% behind the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4151). HD Graphics 530's average of 3332 sits 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M (3316), 1.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 920M (3287), 1.7% behind the Intel HD Graphics P4600 (3389), and 2.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 (3431). These rival comparisons show that HD Graphics 630 competes in a slightly higher performance bracket than HD Graphics 530.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Vulkan workloads?

A: Intel HD Graphics 630 is dramatically faster. It scores 3540 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 1422 for HD Graphics 530, a 148.9% advantage.

Q: Are these GPUs the same under the hood?

A: They share the same core configuration: 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 3 ROPs. The differences are architectural: HD Graphics 630 uses Generation 9.5 on 14 nm++, while HD Graphics 530 uses Generation 9.0 on 14 nm+.

Q: What is the clock speed difference?

A: Both have a 350 MHz base clock. HD Graphics 630 boosts to 1000 MHz, while HD Graphics 530 boosts to 950 MHz.

Q: How do they compare in OpenCL performance?

A: Very closely. HD Graphics 630 scores 3587 and HD Graphics 530 scores 3550, a difference of just 1%.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The Vulkan support in HD Graphics 630 is far more performant in practice, however.

Q: How does HD Graphics 630 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: Its average score of 4075 is 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB, 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M, and 1.5% ahead of the AMD FirePro M4150.

Where Each One Wins

HD Graphics 630 wins across the entire benchmark suite, but the magnitude of its victories determines where it makes sense. In Vulkan-based applications, the choice is unambiguous. The 148.9% lead over HD Graphics 530 means modern Vulkan games and compute workloads will run at a completely different performance level. This is the strongest use case for HD Graphics 630.

For Metal workloads, HD Graphics 630 holds a 1.5% edge. This is small enough that users on macOS or other Metal-centric platforms would see little practical difference. The 5099 Metal score versus 5025 is within noise. If Metal is the primary API, either GPU will deliver similar results.

OpenCL workloads show the same pattern. The 1% advantage for HD Graphics 630 (3587 versus 3550) means compute tasks in OpenCL will not meaningfully distinguish between the two. For users whose software stack relies on OpenCL, the upgrade from HD Graphics 530 to HD Graphics 630 offers minimal tangible benefit.

The average benchmark score tells the broader story. HD Graphics 630's 4075 average places it in a performance class that includes the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB and NVIDIA Quadro K2100M, while HD Graphics 530's 3332 average aligns it with the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M and Intel HD Graphics P4600. This places HD Graphics 630 roughly 22% ahead of HD Graphics 530 in overall average performance, a gap driven almost entirely by the Vulkan result.

In practical terms, HD Graphics 630 is the pick for users who want the best integrated graphics performance from the Kaby Lake generation, particularly for Vulkan-capable software. HD Graphics 530 remains a serviceable option for legacy workloads, especially those using OpenCL or Metal, where it trails by only 1% to 1.5%. For any Vulkan workload, however, HD Graphics 530 falls far behind, and the data offers no scenario where it outperforms its successor.