Intel HD Graphics 530 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M and the Intel HD Graphics 530 represent two distinct approaches to integrated and discrete mobile graphics. The GT 740M is a dedicated Kepler-based GPU from 2013, while the HD 530 is Intel’s Gen 9.0 integrated solution from 2015. Benchmark data shows the GT 740M leading in both shared tests, but the HD 530 counters with a higher peak score in a test the NVIDIA part does not support. This analysis breaks down the numbers, architecture, and use-case implications.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M has an average benchmark score of 3717, while the Intel HD Graphics 530 scores 3332. The GT 740M also holds a higher percentile ranking at 22 versus the HD 530’s 20.

Q: How large is the GT 740M’s lead in the OpenCL benchmark?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GT 740M scores 3974 against the HD 530’s 3550. That is an 11.9% advantage for the NVIDIA part.

Q: What is the most significant performance gap between the two in shared tests?

A: The largest delta is in the Geekbench Vulkan test. The GT 740M scores 3459, while the HD 530 scores only 1422, giving the GT 740M a 143.2% lead.

Q: Does the Intel HD Graphics 530 outperform the GT 740M in any benchmark?

A: Yes. The HD 530 has a Geekbench Metal score of 5025, a test for which the GT 740M has no listed score. This is higher than any score the GT 740M achieves in its available tests.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each GPU based on average score?

A: The GT 740M’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro 3000M with an average score of 3718 (0% delta). The HD 530’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M with an average score of 3316 (0.5% delta for the Intel part).

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The GT 740M has a transistor density of 11.7M per mm², based on 1,020 million transistors on an 87 mm² die. The HD 530 has no listed transistor count or density, though its die size is 123 mm².

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for raw compute throughput in cross-platform APIs: the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M. Its OpenCL score of 3974 is 11.9% ahead of the HD 530’s 3550, and its Vulkan score of 3459 is more than double the Intel part’s 1422. For any workload that uses Vulkan or OpenCL, the GT 740M is the preferable option.

However, the HD 530 is not without merit. Its Metal score of 5025 is the single highest benchmark result between the two GPUs, and it achieves this while operating in a 15 W TDP envelope versus the GT 740M’s 33 W. For users on platforms that prioritize Metal (Apple’s API) or those with strict power limits, the HD 530 is the better fit. The GT 740M wins the head-to-head benchmarks 2–0, but the HD 530 wins the efficiency and API-coverage argument.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains two tests, and the GT 740M wins both decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GT 740M posts 3974 against 3550 for the HD 530. The 424-point gap translates to an 11.9% advantage, a meaningful margin that indicates the discrete GPU’s shading units are being utilized more effectively despite the HD 530’s newer architecture.

The Vulkan test is where the separation becomes dramatic. The GT 740M scores 3459, while the HD 530 manages only 1422. The deltaPct of 143.2% means the NVIDIA part is nearly two and a half times faster. This is likely a reflection of the GT 740M’s dedicated memory interface (64-bit with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth) versus the HD 530’s system-shared memory, which is described as “System Dependent” in bandwidth. Vulkan’s low-level nature exposes such bottlenecks more readily than OpenCL.

The HD 530’s only counter is in the Geekbench Metal test, where it scores 5025. This is not part of the head-to-head comparison because the GT 740M has no Metal result. Still, it is 26.4% higher than the GT 740M’s best OpenCL score and 45.3% higher than its Vulkan score. For Metal-specific applications, the HD 530 is the superior choice, but this advantage does not transfer to the cross-platform tests.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ fundamentally in memory architecture. The GT 740M has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding a fixed 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The HD 530 uses “System Shared” memory with a “System Shared” bus width and “System Dependent” bandwidth, meaning its performance is tied to the host system’s RAM configuration.

Clock speeds also differ. The GT 740M runs at a 980 MHz base clock with a 1033 MHz boost. The HD 530 starts at 350 MHz base and boosts to 950 MHz. Despite the HD 530’s lower base, its boost clock is close to the GT 740M’s, but the NVIDIA part maintains a higher floor.

Compute resources are lopsided. The GT 740M has 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The HD 530 has 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and only 3 ROPs. The GT 740M’s pixel rate is 8.264 GPixel/s versus 2.850 GPixel/s for the Intel part, and its texture rate is 33.06 GTexel/s versus 22.80 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 793.3 GFLOPS for the GT 740M and 364.8 GFLOPS for the HD 530.

The bus interface differs: the GT 740M uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the HD 530 uses a Ring Bus. The GT 740M is an MXM module with no power connectors, while the HD 530 is an IGP.

Architecture Differences

The GT 740M is built on NVIDIA’s Kepler 2.0 architecture, using the GK208 chip manufactured on TSMC’s 28 nm process. It packs 1,020 million transistors into an 87 mm² die, resulting in a density of 11.7M per mm². The HD 530 uses Intel’s Generation 9.0 architecture with the Skylake GT2 chip on a 14 nm+ process from Intel. Its die size is 123 mm², but no transistor count or density is listed.

The process node difference is significant: 28 nm versus 14 nm+. The GT 740M compensates with a higher TDP of 33 W, while the HD 530 draws only 15 W. This power budget allows the GT 740M to run higher clocks and more shading units.

Shader configuration diverges sharply. The GT 740M’s 384 shading units are arranged with 32 TMUs and 8 ROPs. The HD 530’s 192 shading units come with 24 TMUs and just 3 ROPs. The ROP count is particularly low for the Intel part, which explains its 2.850 GPixel/s pixel rate against the GT 740M’s 8.264 GPixel/s.

API support reveals another split. The GT 740M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The HD 530 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The Intel part has a higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version, but its Vulkan performance is far lower in practice.

The HD 530 also lists FP16 performance at 729.6 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the GT 740M has no FP16 data. This suggests the Intel part can handle half-precision workloads better, though the GT 740M’s FP32 output is more than double at 793.3 GFLOPS versus 364.8 GFLOPS.

Where Each One Wins

The GT 740M wins in every scenario where Vulkan or OpenCL is the primary API. Its 143.2% Vulkan lead makes it the obvious choice for Linux gaming or applications built on Vulkan. The 11.9% OpenCL advantage covers compute workloads like video encoding or physics simulation that use this API. The dedicated 2 GB memory buffer also provides consistent bandwidth (14.40 GB/s) regardless of system configuration, which is critical for texture-heavy 3D applications.

The HD 530 wins in power-constrained environments. Its 15 W TDP is less than half the GT 740M’s 33 W, making it suitable for ultra-thin laptops where thermal headroom is minimal. Its Metal score of 5025 is the highest single benchmark result in this comparison, so macOS or iOS-adjacent workloads that leverage Metal will see better performance. The HD 530 also has a higher DirectX feature level (12_1 versus 11_0), which may enable certain modern rendering features, and its Vulkan 1.3 support is newer than the GT 740M’s 1.2.175.

For users who need raw compute across common APIs, the GT 740M is the data-backed pick. For users who prioritize power efficiency, Metal compatibility, or a newer feature set, the HD 530 holds the edge. The head-to-head scoreboard reads 2–0 in favor of NVIDIA, but the Intel part’s unique strengths outside those two tests prevent a total shutout.