Intel HD Graphics 630 vs NVIDIA GeForce 830M Comparison

Intel HD Graphics 630 and NVIDIA GeForce 830M are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions, but they represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel part is a Generation 9.5 integrated GPU built on a 14 nm++ process, while the NVIDIA part is a discrete-class Maxwell chip on 28 nm. Benchmark data shows a tight overall competition, with the Intel part averaging 4075 points across all tests versus 3957 for the NVIDIA, placing both at the 24th percentile of all GPUs. However, head-to-head results tell a more nuanced story, with the NVIDIA winning both shared tests but by dramatically different margins.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs were evaluated in two common compute workloads: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In OpenCL, the NVIDIA GeForce 830M delivers a decisive victory, scoring 4324 against Intel's 3587. That represents a 17% advantage for the NVIDIA part, which is a substantial margin in synthetic compute testing. This result aligns with the raw specification gap—the GeForce 830M has 256 shading units and a peak FP32 throughput of 588.8 GFLOPS, while the Intel HD Graphics 630 offers only 192 shading units and 384.0 GFLOPS. The NVIDIA part’s higher clock speeds (1082 MHz base, 1150 MHz boost) also contribute to its commanding lead in this API.

The Vulkan test tells a nearly opposite story in terms of margin. Here, the GeForce 830M wins again, but only by 1.4%, scoring 3590 versus Intel's 3540. This near-tie suggests that the Intel iGPU is far more competitive in modern, low-level graphics APIs than its older architecture would suggest. The Intel part supports Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_1), while the NVIDIA part supports Vulkan 1.4 but only DirectX 12 (11_0). The Intel's newer feature set in certain areas may help it close the gap in Vulkan, despite the NVIDIA's raw compute advantage. Importantly, there is no Geekbench Metal result for the NVIDIA part, while the Intel HD Graphics 630 scores 5099 in that test, giving it a unique advantage on Apple platforms.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the Intel part's average score of 4075 places it just 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB (4093) and 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M (4033). The NVIDIA GeForce 830M's average of 3957 puts it essentially tied with the AMD Radeon R5 M420 (3956) and just 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M (3953). This indicates that while the GeForce 830M wins the head-to-head, both parts are clustered in the same performance tier, with neither offering a transformative leap over the other in aggregate.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce 830M is the clear winner in raw compute-heavy workloads, as evidenced by its 17% lead in OpenCL. This suggests it is better suited for tasks that leverage general-purpose GPU computing, such as video encoding acceleration or physics simulations in older titles. Its higher pixel rate (9.200 GPixel/s versus 3.000 GPixel/s) and 8 ROPs (versus 3 on the Intel) also give it a significant edge in fill-rate-bound scenarios, which often occur at lower resolutions with heavy anti-aliasing. The NVIDIA part's dedicated 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus (14.40 GB/s bandwidth) provides consistent, predictable memory performance, whereas the Intel relies on system shared memory with bandwidth that is "System Dependent."

The Intel HD Graphics 630 wins in efficiency and platform integration. It has a TDP of just 15 W compared to the GeForce 830M's 33 W, making it far more suitable for ultra-thin laptops where battery life is paramount. It also supports a newer DirectX feature level (12_1 versus 11_0), which can enable more advanced rendering techniques in games that specifically require that feature level. Furthermore, the Intel part's Vulkan 1.3 support and its Geekbench Metal score of 5099—which is its best result—make it a more versatile option in cross-platform environments, particularly for macOS-based systems where Metal is the primary graphics API. The Intel's 1.4% margin in Vulkan, despite the NVIDIA's compute advantage, shows it can hold its own in modern gaming APIs.

In terms of overall percentile ranking, both GPUs sit at the 24th percentile of all GPUs, meaning they are entry-level performers. Neither will drive high-refresh-rate gaming at native resolution, but the GeForce 830M's advantage in OpenCL and its superior pixel throughput make it the better choice for users who prioritize compute and traditional rasterization performance. The Intel part is the better choice for users who need a low-power solution with broad API compatibility and who may not play demanding 3D games.

Architecture Differences

The Intel HD Graphics 630 is built on Intel's Generation 9.5 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm++ process node at Intel's own foundry. It uses the Kaby Lake GT2 chip, which is an integrated GPU sharing the Ring Bus interface with the CPU. The architecture emphasizes efficiency and integration, with 24 texture mapping units and 3 ROPs, but its peak FP32 performance of 384.0 GFLOPS is modest. It supports FP16 at a 2:1 ratio (768.0 GFLOPS), which can accelerate certain compute workloads that utilize half-precision arithmetic. The GPU has no dedicated memory, relying entirely on system shared memory, which can be a bottleneck but also means it uses no additional power for VRAM.

The NVIDIA GeForce 830M uses the Maxwell architecture, specifically the GM108 chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This is a discrete GPU with 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 13.2M per mm². Maxwell is designed for power efficiency within a discrete package, but it still requires 33 W of power. The chip has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, which is a more balanced configuration than the Intel part. Its FP32 throughput is 588.8 GFLOPS, and it has no FP16 support, focusing entirely on 32-bit precision. The GeForce 830M interfaces via PCIe 3.0 x8 and has its own 2 GB DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus.

The architectural philosophies diverge on memory and compute. Intel's approach is to share system memory, which simplifies system design but limits bandwidth to whatever the laptop's RAM provides. NVIDIA's approach is to include dedicated memory, ensuring a fixed 14.40 GB/s bandwidth regardless of system configuration. In terms of feature support, the Intel part has a higher DirectX feature level (12_1 versus 11_0), which is notable for Microsoft's API, but the NVIDIA part supports Vulkan 1.4, a newer version of the low-level API. Neither part has ray tracing or tensor cores, confirming their entry-level status.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ significantly across nearly every core specification. The Intel HD Graphics 630 has a base clock of 350 MHz and a boost clock of 1000 MHz, while the NVIDIA GeForce 830M runs much faster at 1082 MHz base and 1150 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part also has more shading units (256 versus 192) and more ROPs (8 versus 3), though the Intel part has more TMUs (24 versus 16). This results in different throughput rates: the NVIDIA achieves 9.200 GPixel/s and 18.40 GTexel/s, while the Intel manages 3.000 GPixel/s and 24.00 GTexel/s. The Intel has a higher texture fill rate, but the NVIDIA has a far higher pixel fill rate.

Memory configurations are entirely different. The Intel uses system shared memory with a system-dependent bus width and bandwidth, while the NVIDIA has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA's memory clock is 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), while the Intel's memory clock is listed as "System Shared." Power consumption differs substantially: the Intel is rated at 15 W TDP, while the NVIDIA is rated at 33 W TDP. The NVIDIA uses no power connectors and has a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, while the Intel uses a Ring Bus interface. Display outputs are motherboard dependent for the Intel and portable device dependent for the NVIDIA.

API support shows a split: the Intel supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, while the NVIDIA supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part has a known predecessor (GeForce 700M) and successor (GeForce 900M), while the Intel part has no listed predecessor or successor. The release dates differ by over two years, with the Intel launching on 2016-08-29 and the NVIDIA on 2014-03-11. Neither part has a launch MSRP listed in the data.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel HD Graphics 630 has a higher average benchmark score of 4075, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce 830M's 3957. Both are at the 24th percentile of all GPUs.

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

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA GeForce 830M leads by 17%, scoring 4324 versus 3587 for the Intel. This is the largest delta in any shared benchmark.

Q: How close are the two in Vulkan performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 830M wins the Geekbench Vulkan test by only 1.4%, with a score of 3590 versus 3540 for the Intel HD Graphics 630.

Q: Does the Intel HD Graphics 630 support any API that the NVIDIA GeForce 830M does not?

A: Yes, the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, while the NVIDIA part only supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support Vulkan, but the NVIDIA supports version 1.4 versus Intel's 1.3.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 830M has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel HD Graphics 630 uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent."

Q: Which GPU has a lower power consumption?

A: The Intel HD Graphics 630 has a TDP of 15 W, which is less than half of the NVIDIA GeForce 830M's 33 W TDP. This makes the Intel part more suitable for power-constrained laptops.