Intel HD Graphics 530 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX110 Comparison

NVIDIA GeForce MX110 and Intel HD Graphics 530 represent two very different approaches to integrated and entry-level graphics, one a discrete mobile GPU from NVIDIA’s Maxwell family and the other an Intel processor-integrated solution from the Skylake generation. The recorded data shows a clear overall winner in raw compute performance, but the comparison is more nuanced when considering API support, memory architecture, and the specific workloads each part targets.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these GPUs, and the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 wins both. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the MX110 scores 4255 points against 3550 for the HD Graphics 530, a 19.9% advantage. This is a substantial margin for compute workloads that leverage OpenCL, such as GPGPU tasks and certain content creation filters. The MX110’s score places it in the 23rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the HD Graphics 530 sits at the 20th percentile, so both are near the lower end of the performance spectrum, but the NVIDIA part is consistently ahead.

The Vulkan result is far more lopsided. The MX110 scores 3413 points, while the HD Graphics 530 manages only 1422, giving NVIDIA a 140% lead. This is not a small gap; it is a dominant victory in API-level performance for Vulkan applications. For any workload that uses this modern graphics API, the MX110 is more than twice as fast in the recorded metric. The HD Graphics 530 does have a Geekbench Metal score of 5025, which is higher than any score recorded for the MX110, but the MX110 was not tested in Metal, so a direct comparison in that API is not possible from the data.

Looking at average benchmark scores across the database, the MX110 averages 3834 points, while the HD Graphics 530 averages 3332 points. That is a 502-point difference, or roughly 15% in favor of the NVIDIA part. The nearest rivals for the MX110 include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 at 3823 (0.3% ahead of the MX110), the Intel UHD Graphics 710 at 3792 (1.1% behind), the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics at 3883 (1.2% ahead), and the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 at 3898 (1.6% ahead). This cluster of scores shows that the MX110 is competitive with a wide range of older discrete and newer integrated parts, landing right in the middle of a tight performance band.

The HD Graphics 530’s nearest rivals are similarly close. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M averages 3316, which is 0.5% behind the Intel part. The NVIDIA GeForce 920M averages 3287, 1.4% behind. The Intel HD Graphics P4600 averages 3389, 1.7% ahead, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 averages 3431, 2.9% ahead. The HD Graphics 530 thus sits in a slightly lower performance neighborhood than the MX110, with its closest competitors being older mid-range mobile and desktop parts. In both head-to-head tests, the MX110’s margin over the HD Graphics 530 is larger than the margins between either GPU and its nearest rivals, which reinforces that this is a meaningful performance tier separation.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is significant. The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 uses the GM108S chip, built on the Maxwell architecture, and manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The chip contains 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The Intel HD Graphics 530 uses the Skylake GT2 chip, built on Intel’s Generation 9.0 architecture, manufactured by Intel on a 14 nm+ process. Its die size is larger at 123 mm², though the database does not record its transistor count or density. The MX110 is a discrete GPU with its own dedicated memory, while the HD Graphics 530 is an integrated GPU that shares system resources.

Memory configuration is where the two diverge most sharply. The MX110 comes with 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 40.10 GB/s of bandwidth. Its memory clock is 1253 MHz, which translates to 5 Gbps effective. The HD Graphics 530 uses system shared memory, with the type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. This means the Intel part’s memory performance is entirely dependent on the host system’s RAM configuration, whereas the MX110 has fixed, dedicated bandwidth. For memory-intensive workloads, the MX110’s dedicated GDDR5 provides a consistent and predictable advantage.

The compute resources also differ in structure. The MX110 has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units. The HD Graphics 530 has 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and only 3 ROPs. The MX110 has more shaders and more ROPs, while the Intel part has more TMUs. This explains some of the performance differences in different workload types: the MX110 should excel at pixel throughput and shader-heavy tasks, while the HD Graphics 530 has a higher theoretical texture fill rate. Indeed, the recorded pixel rate for the MX110 is 8.048 GPixel/s versus 2.850 GPixel/s for the Intel part, a 2.8x advantage for NVIDIA. However, the texture rate tells the opposite story: the HD Graphics 530 achieves 22.80 GTexel/s versus 16.10 GTexel/s for the MX110, a 41.6% advantage for Intel.

Clock speeds are another differentiator. The MX110 has a base clock of 978 MHz and a boost clock of 1006 MHz, while the HD Graphics 530 runs at 350 MHz base and 950 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part runs at a much higher sustained clock, which contributes to its FP32 throughput of 515.1 GFLOPS versus 364.8 GFLOPS for Intel. The HD Graphics 530 does support FP16 at 729.6 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, a feature the MX110 does not list. The MX110 is rated at 30 W TDP, while the HD Graphics 530 is rated at 15 W, reflecting the power cost of the discrete GPU’s higher performance.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 is the clear winner in raw compute benchmarks, taking both recorded head-to-head tests. Its 19.9% OpenCL lead and 140% Vulkan lead make it the better choice for applications that use these APIs, such as GPU-accelerated rendering, video encoding, and modern game titles that support Vulkan. The MX110’s dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 40.10 GB/s bandwidth is a major advantage over the system-shared memory of the HD Graphics 530, particularly for texture-heavy workloads and any task where memory bandwidth is the bottleneck. Its higher pixel rate of 8.048 GPixel/s also makes it better suited for higher resolution output and post-processing effects that rely on ROP throughput.

The Intel HD Graphics 530 does have specific advantages. Its texture rate of 22.80 GTexel/s is higher than the MX110’s 16.10 GTexel/s, so in workloads that are heavily texture-bound, such as certain older games or texture-filtering tasks, the Intel part could perform relatively better. The HD Graphics 530 also supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the MX110 only supports DirectX 12 (11_0). This is a meaningful feature difference, as the 12_1 feature level includes additional capabilities for certain modern rendering techniques. The Intel part also supports FP16 at 729.6 GFLOPS, which can be useful in machine learning inference or media processing that uses half precision.

For Vulkan, the MX110 supports version 1.4, while the HD Graphics 530 supports version 1.3. The MX110’s 140% Vulkan lead suggests that not only does it support a newer API version, but it executes Vulkan workloads far more efficiently. The HD Graphics 530 has a Metal benchmark score of 5025, which is higher than any score recorded for the MX110, but since the MX110 lacks a Metal score, this cannot be directly compared. In terms of system integration, the HD Graphics 530’s 15 W TDP is half that of the MX110, making it the lower-power option for thin-and-light systems where battery life is prioritized over graphics performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL workloads?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 scores 4255 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to 3550 for the Intel HD Graphics 530, a 19.9% advantage for the NVIDIA part.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap between these two?

A: The MX110 scores 3413 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the HD Graphics 530 scores 1422, giving the MX110 a 140% lead.

Q: Does the Intel HD Graphics 530 have any advantages in memory bandwidth?

A: No, the HD Graphics 530 uses system shared memory with bandwidth listed as system dependent, while the MX110 has dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 40.10 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports a higher DirectX feature level?

A: The Intel HD Graphics 530 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 supports DirectX 12 (11_0).

Q: How do these GPUs compare in average benchmark score?

A: The MX110 averages 3834 points, while the HD Graphics 530 averages 3332 points, a difference of about 15% in favor of the NVIDIA part.

Q: Is the HD Graphics 530 more power efficient?

A: Yes, the HD Graphics 530 is rated at 15 W TDP, while the MX110 is rated at 30 W TDP, making the Intel part the lower-power option despite its lower performance.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every core specification. The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 uses the GM108S chip on the Maxwell architecture, fabricated by TSMC at 28 nm, while the Intel HD Graphics 530 uses the Skylake GT2 chip on Generation 9.0 architecture, fabricated by Intel at 14 nm+. The MX110 has 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die with a density of 13.2 million per square millimeter; the HD Graphics 530 has a 123 mm² die with no recorded transistor count or density. The MX110 has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, while the HD Graphics 530 has 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 3 ROPs.

Clock speeds differ significantly: the MX110 runs at 978 MHz base and 1006 MHz boost, while the HD Graphics 530 runs at 350 MHz base and 950 MHz boost. Memory is another major split, with the MX110 featuring 2 GB GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus at 40.10 GB/s, while the HD Graphics 530 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The MX110’s pixel rate is 8.048 GPixel/s versus 2.850 GPixel/s for Intel, but the HD Graphics 530’s texture rate is 22.80 GTexel/s versus 16.10 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. FP32 throughput is 515.1 GFLOPS for the MX110 and 364.8 GFLOPS for Intel, while FP16 is only listed for the HD Graphics 530 at 729.6 GFLOPS. TDP is 30 W for the MX110 and 15 W for the HD Graphics 530. The MX110 uses a PCIe 3.0 x4 bus interface, while the HD Graphics 530 uses a ring bus. The MX110 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the HD Graphics 530 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The MX110 has no power connectors, while the HD Graphics 530 has no recorded power connector data. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the MX110 and motherboard dependent for the HD Graphics 530. The MX110 was released in November 2017, while the HD Graphics 530 was released in August 2015, and both are listed as end-of-life products.