GPU Comparison

Intel HD Graphics 530 and NVIDIA GeForce 820A are both end-of-life mobile-class graphics solutions aimed at similar ultra-low-power segments, but the benchmark data shows a clear, if modest, overall winner. In the only directly comparable compute test, the Intel part leads by 19%, while also offering a much broader feature set, including Vulkan support and higher DirectX compliance. The NVIDIA part counters with a dedicated 1 GB memory pool, which can be advantageous in specific memory-bandwidth-sensitive scenarios, though its architectural age is evident in its raw throughput figures.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel HD Graphics 530 is the definitive winner for general-purpose compute and modern API compatibility. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 3550 versus the 820A's 2983 (a 19% advantage) demonstrates significantly higher raw shader throughput, driven by 192 shading units compared to 96, and a peak FP32 rate of 364.8 GFLOPS against 240.0 GFLOPS. Furthermore, the Intel part is the only one of the two that supports Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_1); the 820A lacks Vulkan entirely and only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0). This makes the HD 530 the only viable option for titles or workloads that rely on these newer APIs.

The NVIDIA GeForce 820A's single clear advantage lies in its memory architecture. It has a dedicated 1024 MB DDR3 frame buffer with a 64-bit bus and 16.02 GB/s of bandwidth. In contrast, the HD 530 uses "System Shared" memory with "System Dependent" bandwidth. This means the 820A will not contend with the CPU for system RAM and has a fixed, predictable memory latency profile. For legacy applications or specific embedded use cases where dedicated VRAM is mandatory, the 820A wins by default, despite its lower compute potential.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in raw compute performance?

A: The Intel HD Graphics 530. In the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, it scores 3550 compared to the NVIDIA GeForce 820A's 2983, a 19% performance advantage.

Q: Does the NVIDIA GeForce 820A support Vulkan?

A: No. The FACT PACK lists no Vulkan API support for the 820A. The Intel HD Graphics 530, by contrast, supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 820A has a dedicated 16.02 GB/s of bandwidth from its 64-bit DDR3 interface. The Intel HD Graphics 530's bandwidth is "System Dependent," meaning it shares system memory without a fixed dedicated figure.

Q: How does the Intel HD Graphics 530 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It is within 1.4% of the NVIDIA GeForce 920M (score 3287) and 0.5% of the GeForce GT 730M (score 3316). It is 1.7% slower than the Intel HD Graphics P4600 (score 3389).

Q: What is the pixel throughput difference between the two?

A: The Intel HD Graphics 530 has a pixel rate of 2.850 GPixel/s, while the NVIDIA GeForce 820A is slightly lower at 2.500 GPixel/s.

Q: What is the transistor count of the NVIDIA chip?

A: The GeForce 820A is built on the GF117 chip containing 585 million transistors on a 116 mm² die.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are conclusive. The Intel HD Graphics 530 scores 3550, while the NVIDIA GeForce 820A scores 2983. The deltaPct is 19%, meaning the Intel part is nearly a fifth faster in this synthetic compute test. This substantial gap aligns with the underlying specifications: the Intel GPU has double the shading units (192 vs 96), higher TMU count (24 vs 16), and significantly better texture fill rate (22.80 GTexel/s vs 10.00 GTexel/s). The 820A does manage a higher ROP count (8 vs 3), which theoretically aids final pixel output, but its lower pixel rate (2.500 GPixel/s vs 2.850 GPixel/s) shows that the Intel part still wins in that specific metric as well. There is no benchmark data provided for Vulkan or Metal where the Intel part also has a score (1422 and 5025 respectively), but the NVIDIA part has no data for those tests, reinforcing the Intel advantage in API coverage.

Specification Differences

The core specification disparity is stark. The Intel HD Graphics 530 is built on a 14 nm+ process with a die size of 123 mm², while the NVIDIA GeForce 820A uses a 28 nm process with a 116 mm² die. The Intel chip houses 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 3 ROPs, whereas the NVIDIA chip has 96 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Clock behavior differs as well: Intel specifies a base clock of 350 MHz and a boost of 950 MHz, while the NVIDIA part lists no base or boost clocks, only a memory clock of 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective). Memory configuration is completely different: Intel uses "System Shared" memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while NVIDIA uses 1024 MB of dedicated DDR3 on a 64-bit bus providing 16.02 GB/s. The bus interface also differs: Intel uses "Ring Bus" while NVIDIA uses "PCIe 2.0 x16". Finally, the NVIDIA part explicitly has "powerConnectors": "None", while the Intel part lists no power connectors due to being an IGP.

Architecture Differences

These are two fundamentally different architectures from different generations. The Intel HD Graphics 530 is based on the Skylake GT2 chip, using Intel's Generation 9.0 architecture (also noted as "HD Graphics (Skylake)"). It is manufactured by Intel on a 14 nm+ process. The NVIDIA GeForce 820A is built on the GF117 chip, using the Fermi 2.0 architecture from the GeForce 800A generation. It is fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process with 585 million transistors and a transistor density of 5.0M / mm². The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA part supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but notably lacks Vulkan support. The NVIDIA part also has a predecessor (GeForce 700A) and successor (GeForce 900A) in its lineup, while the Intel part has no listed predecessor or successor. The Intel part has a notably higher FP16 rate of 729.6 GFLOPS (2:1 ratio), a capability the NVIDIA part does not list at all.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the Intel HD Graphics 530 is the superior product for nearly all use cases. It wins the only direct benchmark comparison by 19%, has more shading units, higher texture and pixel rates, and supports modern APIs like Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_1) that the NVIDIA part lacks. Its average benchmark score of 3332 places it in the 20th percentile of all GPUs, just ahead of the 820A's 19th percentile and average score of 2983. The Intel part also sits in a competitive position relative to its nearest rivals, being virtually tied with the GeForce GT 730M and 920M, and only 2.9% behind the GeForce GT 740.

The NVIDIA GeForce 820A should only be chosen when the dedicated 1024 MB frame buffer is an absolute requirement. Its fixed 16.02 GB/s bandwidth and 64-bit memory bus may be preferable in systems where shared memory is problematic or system RAM is scarce. However, this is a narrow niche. The 820A's Fermi 2.0 architecture is older, its compute performance is 19% lower, and it cannot run Vulkan applications. In any scenario where software compatibility or raw compute matters, the Intel HD Graphics 530 is the clear pick. The data shows a decisive verdict: Intel wins on performance, features, and API support.