GPU Comparison

Intel HD Graphics 530 and NVIDIA Quadro P600 occupy very different corners of the GPU market, yet both are now end-of-life products. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the integrated Skylake part still holds relevance for basic desktop tasks. This analysis breaks down the benchmark results, architectural differences, and practical use cases for each.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two shared benchmark tests tell a decisive story. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA Quadro P600 scores 11,181 against Intel HD Graphics 530's 3,550. That is a 68.2% advantage for the Quadro, meaning it delivers roughly three times the compute throughput in this API. The gap widens further in Geekbench Vulkan, where the P600 posts 9,755 versus 1,422 for the HD 530, a staggering 85.4% deficit for the Intel part. In raw numbers, the Quadro is over six times faster in Vulkan.

These deltas are not marginal. They represent fundamental differences in shader count, memory bandwidth, and driver optimization. The HD 530's best showing is in OpenCL, where its 192 shading units at least keep it within striking distance of older discrete mobile GPUs. Its nearest rival data confirms this: the HD 530 averages 3,332 across all benchmarks, sitting just 0.5% above a GeForce GT 730M and 1.4% above a GeForce 920M. Meanwhile, the Quadro P600's average benchmark score of 2,923 is dragged down by its Passmark DirectX results, which are anomalously low (scores of 14, 24, 14, and 56 across DX9 through DX12). Ignore those, and its Geekbench numbers place it firmly in modern entry-level discrete territory.

It is worth noting the percentile rankings. The HD 530 sits at the 20th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro P600 is at the 19th. Despite the massive head-to-head losses, the Intel part actually ranks marginally higher overall, a quirk of the benchmark database's weighting, likely due to the Quadro's poor Passmark DirectX scores. The practical takeaway: neither card is a gaming powerhouse, but the Quadro absolutely dominates in compute-oriented workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P600 is dramatically faster, scoring 9,755 against Intel HD Graphics 530's 1,422. This is an 85.4% delta in favor of the Quadro, making it the clear choice for Vulkan-based applications.

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

A: The HD 530's average benchmark score is 3,332. It sits 0.5% above the GeForce GT 730M (3,316), 1.4% above the GeForce 920M (3,287), but 1.7% below the Intel HD Graphics P4600 (3,389) and 2.9% below the GeForce GT 740 (3,431). It is effectively a low-end mobile-class performer.

Q: What is the Quadro P600's average benchmark score?

A: The Quadro P600 averages 2,923 across all tests. This is heavily influenced by its Passmark DirectX scores, which are very low (14 in DX10, 24 in DX11, 14 in DX12, 56 in DX9). Its Geekbench scores are far more representative of its compute capability.

Q: Does the Intel HD 530 win any benchmark comparisons?

A: In the head-to-head data, the HD 530 wins zero tests. However, its average benchmark score of 3,332 is higher than the Quadro P600's 2,923, which means it performs better in the aggregate of all recorded benchmarks, likely due to the Quadro's weak Passmark DirectX showing.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Quadro P600 has a pixel rate of 24.91 GPixel/s, which is substantially higher than the HD 530's 2.85 GPixel/s. This gives the Quadro a massive advantage in any rasterization-heavy workload.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Quadro P600 offers 64.13 GB/s of dedicated GDDR5 bandwidth over a 128-bit bus. The HD 530 uses system shared memory with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent," meaning its performance varies with the host system's RAM configuration.

Architecture Differences

These GPUs come from entirely different design philosophies. The Intel HD Graphics 530 is built on the Skylake GT2 chip using Intel's Generation 9.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm+ process at Intel's own foundry. It is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a die size of 123 mm², sharing memory with the CPU. The NVIDIA Quadro P600 uses the GP107 chip with Pascal architecture, manufactured by Samsung on a 14 nm process. Its die is slightly larger at 132 mm², but it packs 3,300 million transistors, a density of 25.0M per mm², compared to the Intel part's unspecified transistor count.

The compute configurations diverge sharply. The HD 530 has 192 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and just 3 ROPs. The Quadro P600 doubles the shading units to 384, keeps 24 TMUs, and jumps to 16 ROPs. This explains the fill rate disparity: 2.85 GPixel/s for Intel versus 24.91 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate also favors the Quadro at 37.37 GTexel/s versus 22.80 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The HD 530 runs at a 350 MHz base with a 950 MHz boost, while the Quadro P600 starts at 1,329 MHz and boosts to 1,557 MHz. Memory clocks are even more divergent: the Intel part uses system shared memory, while the Quadro runs GDDR5 at 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective). FP32 performance is 364.8 GFLOPS for Intel versus 1,195.8 GFLOPS for NVIDIA, a 3.3x gap. FP16 is a curiosity: Intel's 729.6 GFLOPS at 2:1 ratio vastly exceeds the Quadro's 18.68 GFLOPS at 1:64, but this is irrelevant for most workloads since neither card targets compute-heavy FP16 tasks.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet highlights how far apart these products are. The HD 530 is an IGP with system shared memory, while the Quadro P600 is a single-slot discrete card with 2 GB GDDR5. Memory bus width differs: "System Shared" for Intel versus 128-bit for NVIDIA. Bandwidth is "System Dependent" for the integrated part versus a fixed 64.13 GB/s for the Quadro.

Power and physical requirements differ as well. The HD 530 consumes 15 W TDP and uses a Ring Bus interface, whereas the Quadro P600 draws 40 W, requires a PCIe 3.0 x16 slot, and needs a suggested 200 W power supply. The Quadro has no power connectors, measuring 150 mm in length and 69 mm in height. Display outputs are "Motherboard Dependent" for the Intel IGP, while the Quadro offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

API support is nearly identical: both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan, though the Quadro's Vulkan is 1.4 versus the HD 530's 1.3. Production status for both is end-of-life. Release dates are about 17 months apart: the HD 530 launched on 2015-08-31, and the Quadro P600 on 2017-02-06. The Quadro's predecessor is Quadro Maxwell and its successor is Quadro Volta; the Intel part lists no predecessor or successor.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro P600 wins every head-to-head benchmark and dominates in raw compute. Its 384 shading units, 16 ROPs, and dedicated GDDR5 memory make it the obvious choice for any GPU-accelerated workload: OpenCL compute, Vulkan rendering, CAD, video encoding, or light 3D modeling. The 64.13 GB/s bandwidth is a hard requirement for texture-heavy applications, and the 24.91 GPixel/s fill rate handles high-resolution framebuffers without breaking a sweat. The 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs also support multi-monitor professional setups.

The Intel HD 530 wins in aggregate benchmark score, 3,332 versus 2,923, but this is a statistical artifact of the Quadro's abysmal Passmark DirectX results. In real-world terms, the HD 530 is suited for basic desktop use: office productivity, web browsing, video playback, and legacy games. Its 15 W TDP means it costs nothing in power and requires no extra cooling. It is also the only option if you are building a system without a discrete GPU slot or want to avoid the 200 W PSU requirement.

Do not expect the HD 530 to handle modern gaming. Its 3 ROPs and 22.80 GTexel/s texture rate are far below what even entry-level games demand. The Quadro P600, while not a gaming card, will at least run lighter titles at lower settings thanks to its 1,195.8 GFLOPS FP32 throughput.

The Verdict

The choice is straightforward if you have a PCIe slot available: the NVIDIA Quadro P600 is the superior GPU by every technical measure that matters. It is 68.2% faster in OpenCL and 85.4% faster in Vulkan than the HD 530. Its dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 64.13 GB/s bandwidth eliminates the system memory bottleneck that cripples the Intel IGP. The 16 ROPs and 24.91 GPixel/s fill rate make it usable for real graphics work, not just desktop compositing.

Pick the Intel HD Graphics 530 only if you are constrained to integrated graphics, for a low-power office PC, a home theater build, or a system where a discrete card is physically impossible. Its 20th percentile ranking and 3,332 average score show it is competitive with older mobile discrete GPUs like the GeForce GT 730M. For anything beyond basic 2D workloads, the Quadro P600's 19th percentile ranking is misleading; its Geekbench scores place it in a different class entirely. The data says: if you can install a discrete card, do it. The Quadro P600 is the clear winner for any compute-heavy task, and the HD 530 is merely a stopgap for systems that cannot accommodate one.