Intel HD Graphics 630 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 wins all three directly comparable tests. In Geekbench Metal, the GTX 1050 scores 7823 against 5099 for the Intel HD Graphics 630, a 34.8% advantage. That gap widens considerably in Geekbench OpenCL, where the GTX 1050 posts 15233 versus 3587, a 76.5% margin. The Vulkan results tell a similar story, with the GTX 1050 at 8995 and the Intel iGPU at 3540, a 60.6% difference.

The average benchmark score tells a more nuanced story, however. The Intel HD Graphics 630 averages 4075 across its recorded tests, while the GTX 1050 averages 3629. That places the iGPU slightly ahead in aggregate, but this is misleading because the two parts are tested across different workloads. The Intel part only has Geekbench entries, while the GTX 1050 includes a wider array of Passmark tests that pull its average down. When the same test is run on both, the NVIDIA part is faster by every measure.

Percentile positioning confirms the overall picture. The Intel HD Graphics 630 sits at the 24th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the GTX 1050 sits at the 21st percentile. These are close, but the Intel part edges ahead in relative standing. That seems counterintuitive given the head-to-head results, but it reflects the fact that the iGPU's limited test set skews toward compute-oriented Geekbench workloads where it performs relatively better than its gaming-focused rivals.

The GTX 1050's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 735M at 3616 (0.4% behind), the AMD Radeon HD 6770 at 3649 (0.5% ahead), the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation at 3596 (0.9% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 at 3594 (1% behind). The Intel HD Graphics 630's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB at 4093 (0.4% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M at 4033 (1% behind), the AMD FirePro M4150 at 4013 (1.5% behind), and the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M at 4151 (1.8% ahead). Neither part is dramatically out of place among its peers.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 scores 8995, which is 60.6% higher than the Intel HD Graphics 630's 3540.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel HD Graphics 630 averages 4075 across its benchmarks, while the GTX 1050 averages 3629. The Intel part is ahead by roughly 12%, but this is based on different test suites.

Q: Does the GTX 1050 have dedicated memory?

A: Yes, it has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel HD Graphics 630 uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Q: What is the pixel rate difference?

A: The GTX 1050 delivers 46.56 GPixel/s, while the Intel HD Graphics 630 delivers 3.000 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA part is roughly 15 times faster in this metric.

Q: Which GPU supports a newer Vulkan version?

A: The GTX 1050 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Intel HD Graphics 630 supports Vulkan 1.3. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6.

Q: How many shading units does each GPU have?

A: The GTX 1050 has 640 shading units, while the Intel HD Graphics 630 has 192. The NVIDIA part also has 40 texture mapping units versus 24, and 32 ROPs versus 3.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1050 wins every scenario where a discrete GPU matters. In Geekbench OpenCL, its 15233 score is more than four times the Intel part's 3587, indicating dramatically stronger compute throughput. The Vulkan result of 8995 versus 3540 shows the same pattern for graphics API workloads. Texture rate favors the GTX 1050 at 58.20 GTexel/s against 24.00 GTexel/s, and the pixel rate advantage is even more pronounced at 46.56 GPixel/s versus 3.000 GPixel/s. The GTX 1050 also has dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 112.1 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the Intel part depends on system memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

The Intel HD Graphics 630 wins only in aggregate average score and percentile placement. Its 4075 average and 24th percentile standing are slightly better than the GTX 1050's 3629 and 21st percentile. That is a narrow margin, and it comes from the iGPU being tested only in Geekbench workloads. In any scenario where the same test runs on both, the GTX 1050 wins by a substantial margin.

For use cases like basic desktop rendering, video playback, and light productivity, the Intel iGPU is sufficient. It consumes 15 W of power as an integrated part, requires no power connectors, and uses the Ring Bus interface. The GTX 1050 is a dual-slot card that draws 75 W, needs a 250 W suggested power supply, and occupies a PCIe 3.0 x16 slot. For a compact or low-power system, the Intel part makes sense. For gaming, 3D modeling, or any GPU-accelerated workload, the GTX 1050 is the clear choice.

Specification Differences

Memory is the most fundamental difference. The Intel HD Graphics 630 uses system-shared memory with a system-shared bus width and system-dependent bandwidth. The GTX 1050 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth. Memory clock also differs: the Intel part runs at system-shared speeds, while the GTX 1050 runs at 1752 MHz with 7 Gbps effective transfer.

Core configuration diverges sharply. The Intel part has 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 3 ROPs. The GTX 1050 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Clock speeds tell a similar story: the Intel iGPU bases at 350 MHz and boosts to 1000 MHz, while the GTX 1050 bases at 1354 MHz and boosts to 1455 MHz.

Throughput figures favor NVIDIA across the board. Pixel rate is 3.000 GPixel/s for Intel versus 46.56 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate is 24.00 GTexel/s versus 58.20 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 384.0 GFLOPS versus 1.862 TFLOPS. FP16 is 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1) for Intel versus 29.10 GFLOPS (1:64) for NVIDIA.

Power and physical characteristics differ as well. The Intel part is an IGP rated at 15 W with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. The GTX 1050 is a dual-slot card rated at 75 W, also with no power connectors, but with a 250 W suggested PSU. The GTX 1050 measures 145 mm (5.7 inches) long and 111 mm (4.4 inches) tall. Bus interface differs: Ring Bus for Intel versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are motherboard-dependent for Intel, while the GTX 1050 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Architecture Differences

The Intel HD Graphics 630 is built on the Kaby Lake GT2 chip using Generation 9.5 architecture, fabricated on Intel's 14 nm++ process node. The GTX 1050 uses the GP107 chip with Pascal architecture, fabricated by Samsung on a 14 nm process. The GTX 1050 packs 3,300 million transistors on a 132 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 25.0M per mm². The Intel part has no recorded transistor count, die size, or density in the database.

API support is nearly identical: both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. The GTX 1050 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Intel part supports Vulkan 1.3. The GTX 1050 belongs to the GeForce 10-series and the GeForce 10 generation, with its predecessor being the GeForce 900 and its successor the GeForce 20. The Intel part is from the HD Graphics (Kaby Lake) generation, with no recorded predecessor or successor.

Release timing is close: the Intel HD Graphics 630 launched on August 29, 2016, and the GTX 1050 launched on October 24, 2016. Both are end-of-life products. The GTX 1050 had a launch MSRP of 109 USD. The Intel part has no launch MSRP recorded, as it was an integrated component rather than a standalone product.

The Verdict

The data supports a simple conclusion: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 is the faster GPU in every directly comparable benchmark. Its Geekbench Metal score is 34.8% higher, its OpenCL score is 76.5% higher, and its Vulkan score is 60.6% higher than the Intel HD Graphics 630. The compute, texture, and pixel throughput figures all favor NVIDIA by wide margins, and the dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 112.1 GB/s bandwidth removes the system-memory bottleneck that limits the Intel part.

The Intel HD Graphics 630 has one advantage: it is an integrated part that draws only 15 W and requires no additional hardware. That makes it suitable for basic systems where a discrete GPU is unnecessary. Its aggregate average score of 4075 and 24th percentile placement are also slightly better than the GTX 1050's averages, though this reflects the different test suites rather than actual performance parity.

Who should pick the Intel HD Graphics 630? Anyone building a low-power office machine, a home theater PC, or a basic productivity system where the motherboard's display outputs are sufficient. Who should pick the GTX 1050? Anyone who wants to play games, run GPU-accelerated applications, or work with 3D content. The 75 W power draw and dual-slot footprint are modest, and the card requires no power connectors, making it an easy drop into most systems with a 250 W PSU. For any workload that stresses the GPU, the GTX 1050 is the only rational choice.