Intel HD Graphics 530 vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000D Comparison

The Verdict

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D and Intel HD Graphics 530 serve completely different purposes, and the data makes that clear. The Quadro 2000D wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark available, scoring 3930 in Geekbench OpenCL against 3550 for the Intel part, a 10.7% advantage. It also carries a higher overall benchmark average of 3930 versus 3332 for the HD 530. If raw compute throughput in OpenCL is the priority, the Quadro is the pick.

However, the Intel HD Graphics 530 is an integrated processor, not a discrete card. It consumes only 15 W, uses system shared memory, and requires no power connectors or slot space. The Quadro 2000D is a single-slot, 62 W discrete card with 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 memory and a 128 bit bus. The HD 530 belongs in a system where low power, simplicity, and integrated graphics are acceptable. The Quadro belongs in a workstation where a dedicated card with its own memory and display outputs is required.

The HD 530 does have one clear edge in API support: it lists Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_1), while the Quadro lists DirectX 12 (11_0) and no Vulkan entry. For modern workloads using Vulkan, the Intel part is the only option here. For legacy OpenCL compute, the Quadro wins.

Architecture Differences

The Quadro 2000D uses the GF106 chip on NVIDIA's Fermi architecture, built on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It packs 1,170 million transistors into a 238 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 4.9M per mm². The HD Graphics 530 uses the Skylake GT2 chip on Intel's Generation 9.0 architecture, built on Intel's 14 nm+ process with a 123 mm² die. No transistor count is recorded for the Intel part.

The Quadro has 192 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The HD 530 also has 192 shading units but fewer TMUs at 24 and only 3 ROPs. That low ROP count is a major structural difference. The Quadro's pixel rate is 5.000 GPixel/s versus 2.850 GPixel/s for the Intel part, a clear fillrate advantage. Texture rate flips the other way: the Intel part achieves 22.80 GTexel/s against 20.00 GTexel/s for the Quadro.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The Quadro uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 over a 128 bit bus with 41.60 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 530 uses system shared memory, with its bandwidth listed as system dependent. The Quadro's memory clock is 650 MHz (2.6 Gbps effective), while the Intel part has no dedicated memory clock, only a base clock of 350 MHz and boost of 950 MHz for the GPU itself.

The Quadro is a PCIe 2.0 x16 card, 178 mm long and 111 mm tall, with two DVI outputs. The HD 530 is an IGP on a Ring Bus, with motherboard dependent display outputs. The Quadro is a discrete card with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Intel part has no PSU suggestion because it draws power from the motherboard.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded head-to-head test is Geekbench OpenCL. The Quadro 2000D scores 3930, the HD Graphics 530 scores 3550. That is a 10.7% win for the Quadro. In practical terms, this means the Quadro completes OpenCL compute workloads measurably faster, which matters for professional applications that offload work to the GPU.

The HD 530 has additional benchmark entries that the Quadro lacks. It records a Geekbench Metal score of 5025 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 1422. The Quadro has no Metal or Vulkan entries at all. This is not a direct comparison, but it shows the Intel part at least has a path to those APIs, while the Quadro does not.

Looking at weighted averages, the Quadro's average benchmark score is 3930, which places it in the 23rd percentile of all GPUs. The HD 530's average is 3332, in the 20th percentile. The Quadro's nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D at 3919 (0.3% behind), the GeForce GT 745M at 3953 (0.6% ahead), the Radeon R5 M420 at 3956 (0.7% ahead), and the GeForce 830M at 3957 (0.7% ahead). The HD 530's nearest rivals are the GeForce GT 730M at 3316 (0.5% behind), the GeForce 920M at 3287 (1.4% behind), the Intel HD Graphics P4600 at 3389 (1.7% ahead), and the GeForce GT 740 at 3431 (2.9% ahead). Both parts sit in a tight cluster of low-end GPUs, but the Quadro's cluster sits roughly 600 points higher.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D. It scores 3930 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 3550 for the Intel HD Graphics 530, a 10.7% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel HD Graphics 530 support Vulkan?

A: Yes. The HD 530 lists Vulkan 1.3 support and records a Geekbench Vulkan score of 1422. The Quadro 2000D has no Vulkan entry in the database.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro 2000D. It has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus with 41.60 GB/s of dedicated bandwidth. The HD 530 uses system shared memory with bandwidth listed as system dependent.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The Quadro 2000D is rated at 62 W. The Intel HD Graphics 530 is rated at 15 W. The Quadro also suggests a 250 W power supply, while the Intel part has no PSU requirement listed.

Q: How do these compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Quadro 2000D is within 0.7% of the GeForce GT 745M, Radeon R5 M420, and GeForce 830M, and 0.3% ahead of the Quadro K2000D. The HD 530 is within 2.9% of the GeForce GT 740, GT 730M, GeForce 920M, and HD Graphics P4600.

Q: Which has better pixel fillrate?

A: The Quadro 2000D. It delivers 5.000 GPixel/s against 2.850 GPixel/s for the HD 530, due to its 16 ROPs versus 3 ROPs.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro 2000D wins in raw compute and dedicated memory. Its OpenCL score is higher, its pixel rate is nearly double, and it has its own 1024 MB GDDR5 frame buffer over a 128 bit bus. The texture rate is slightly lower at 20.00 GTexel/s versus 22.80 GTexel/s, but the Quadro compensates with far more ROPs. The Quadro is also the only one with a fixed physical footprint: a 178 mm single-slot card with two DVI outputs. It is an end-of-life product from the Fermi generation, released in 2011, with a launch MSRP of 599 USD. Its successor is the Quadro Kepler line, and its predecessor is the Quadro FX Tesla line.

The HD 530 wins on integration and API coverage. It is an IGP with no slot requirement, no power connectors, no PSU suggestion, and just 15 W of power draw. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), the highest feature level recorded between the two, and Vulkan 1.3, which the Quadro lacks entirely. It also has a higher texture rate and a much smaller die at 123 mm² versus 238 mm². Its FP16 capability is listed at 729.6 GFLOPS (2:1), something the Quadro has no recorded equivalent for. The HD 530 is from the Skylake generation, released in 2015, and uses the newer 14 nm+ process.

For a builder assembling a low-power office or media system, the HD 530 avoids the cost and complexity of a discrete card entirely. For a professional workstation task that relies on OpenCL compute, the Quadro 2000D delivers a 10.7% performance advantage and dedicated video memory. The choice comes down to whether the workload needs the Quadro's compute and memory isolation, or whether the HD 530's integration and modern API support are sufficient.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro 2000D | Intel HD Graphics 530 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Fermi | Generation 9.0 |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 14 nm+ |

| Die Size | 238 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistors | 1,170 million | Not listed |

| Transistor Density | 4.9M / mm² | Not listed |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 350 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 950 MHz |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 41.60 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 192 | 192 |

| TMUs | 32 | 24 |

| ROPs | 16 | 3 |

| Pixel Rate | 5.000 GPixel/s | 2.850 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 20.00 GTexel/s | 22.80 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 480.0 GFLOPS | 364.8 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 729.6 GFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 62 W | 15 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | Not listed |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | Ring Bus |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI | Motherboard Dependent |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan Support | Not listed | 1.3 |

| Length | 178 mm (7 inches) | Not listed |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2011-10-04 | 2015-08-31 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | Not listed |

| Average Benchmark Score | 3930 | 3332 |

| Percentile | 23rd | 20th |