Intel HD Graphics P4600 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M Comparison

Intel HD Graphics P4600 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from 2013, but they approach the task from opposite directions: one is a processor-integrated GPU, the other a discrete mobile module. Benchmark data shows they land within 2.2% of each other in average score, placing both at the 20th percentile of all GPUs. The P4600 edges ahead in the single OpenCL test, though the GT 730M counters with a Vulkan score that the Intel part cannot match.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P4600 has an average benchmark score of 3389, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M scores 3316. The P4600 leads by 2.2% in this metric.

Q: How do the two compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P4600 scores 3389, versus 3107 for the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M. This gives the Intel part a 9.1% advantage in OpenCL compute performance.

Q: Does the GT 730M have any benchmark that the P4600 lacks?

A: Yes. The GT 730M has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 3524, while the P4600 has no Vulkan benchmark result in the data. This indicates the NVIDIA part supports Vulkan 1.2.175, whereas Intel only lists Vulkan 1.0 support.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M achieves 5.800 GPixel/s, more than double the Intel HD Graphics P4600's 2.400 GPixel/s. This reflects the GT 730M's 16 ROPs versus the P4600's 2 ROPs.

Q: What is the difference in thermal design power?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P4600 has a TDP of 84 W, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M draws only 33 W. The GT 730M is significantly more power-efficient despite being a discrete GPU.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M has 384 shading units, compared to 160 for the Intel HD Graphics P4600. The NVIDIA part also has 32 texture mapping units versus 20, and 16 ROPs versus 2.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. Intel's HD Graphics P4600 is built on the Haswell GT2 chip using a 22 nm process at Intel's own foundry, while NVIDIA's GT 730M uses the GK107 chip fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm node. This process advantage gives Intel a smaller transistor footprint, though the GT 730M's 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die (10.8M / mm² density) is a more complex design than the P4600's integrated approach.

Architecturally, the P4600 belongs to Intel's Generation 7.5 (HD Graphics-W / Haswell family), whereas the GT 730M is based on NVIDIA's Kepler architecture from the GeForce 700M series. The P4600 uses a Ring Bus interface and shares system memory, with memory type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent." The GT 730M, by contrast, has dedicated 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth, and connects via PCIe 3.0 x16.

The shading resources differ substantially: the P4600 has 160 shading units, 20 TMUs, and only 2 ROPs, while the GT 730M packs 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This explains the GT 730M's higher pixel rate (5.800 GPixel/s vs 2.400 GPixel/s) and FP32 throughput (556.8 GFLOPS vs 384.0 GFLOPS). However, the texture rates are nearly identical at 24.00 GTexel/s for Intel and 23.20 GTexel/s for NVIDIA.

API support shows a split: the P4600 lists DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.3, and Vulkan 1.0, while the GT 730M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The NVIDIA part has newer OpenGL and Vulkan versions, though the Intel part's DirectX 11_1 feature level is slightly higher than the GT 730M's 11_0.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, where the Intel HD Graphics P4600 wins with a score of 3389 against the GT 730M's 3107. That is a 9.1% margin in favor of Intel, a notable result given that the GT 730M has 2.4 times the shading units and 8 times the ROPs. The P4600's higher base clock boost of 1200 MHz (versus 725 MHz on the GT 730M) partially compensates for its fewer execution resources.

Looking at the nearest rivals, the P4600's average score of 3389 places it 1.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 (3431) and 1.3% behind the NVIDIA Quadro 2000M (3434), while leading the Intel HD Graphics 530 (3332) by 1.7%. The GT 730M's average of 3316 puts it 0.5% behind the Intel HD Graphics 530 (3332), 0.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 920M (3287), and 3.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 (3210). In the direct comparison, the P4600 is 2.2% ahead of the GT 730M on average score.

The GT 730M's Vulkan result of 3524 deserves attention. While OpenCL shows Intel leading, Vulkan is a different API with different driver overhead characteristics. The GT 730M's Vulkan 1.2.175 support versus the P4600's Vulkan 1.0 suggests NVIDIA has maintained more mature Vulkan drivers, which could explain why the GT 730M posts a higher score in that test than in OpenCL. The P4600 has no Vulkan benchmark data available, leaving a gap in the comparison.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The process node is 22 nm for Intel versus 28 nm for NVIDIA. The GT 730M has a transistor count of 1,270 million on a 118 mm² die, while the P4600 lists no transistor or die size data. Base clocks are 350 MHz for Intel and 725 MHz for NVIDIA, but the Intel boost reaches 1200 MHz versus NVIDIA's flat 725 MHz. Memory differs fundamentally: the P4600 uses system-shared memory with dependent bandwidth, while the GT 730M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus at 28.80 GB/s.

Compute resources favor NVIDIA: 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs versus Intel's 160, 20, and 2. Pixel rate is 5.800 GPixel/s for NVIDIA versus 2.400 GPixel/s for Intel, and FP32 is 556.8 GFLOPS versus 384.0 GFLOPS. Texture rates are close at 23.20 GTexel/s (NVIDIA) and 24.00 GTexel/s (Intel). TDP strongly favors NVIDIA at 33 W versus 84 W for Intel. The GT 730M is an MXM module with no power connectors, while the P4600 is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface. Display outputs are motherboard-dependent for Intel and portable-device-dependent for NVIDIA. API support differs as noted: Intel has DirectX 12 (11_1) and OpenGL 4.3, NVIDIA has DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel HD Graphics P4600 wins in OpenCL compute, as the 9.1% lead in the head-to-head test demonstrates. It also has a higher boost clock (1200 MHz vs 725 MHz), which helps in burst workloads. The P4600's higher DirectX feature level (11_1 vs 11_0) could matter for certain older games or applications that use those specific features. Its Ring Bus interface and system-shared memory may benefit from fast system RAM, though this is system-dependent.

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M wins in raw throughput metrics: pixel fill rate (5.800 vs 2.400 GPixel/s), FP32 compute (556.8 vs 384.0 GFLOPS), and has 8 times the ROPs. Its 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth provides predictable performance without competing with the CPU for system memory bandwidth. The GT 730M's 33 W TDP makes it far more power-efficient than the 84 W P4600, and its Vulkan 1.2.175 support with a 3524 score in the Vulkan test suggests better modern API performance. OpenGL 4.6 versus 4.3 is another win for NVIDIA.

For gaming, the GT 730M's higher pixel rate and ROP count should translate to better fill-rate-bound scenarios. The P4600's higher texture rate (24.00 vs 23.20 GTexel/s) gives it a marginal edge in texture-heavy workloads, but the NVIDIA part's overall resource advantage is substantial. The GT 730M's MXM form factor means it is replaceable in some laptops, whereas the P4600 is permanently integrated into the processor.

The Verdict

The benchmark data shows a narrow overall win for the Intel HD Graphics P4600, with a 2.2% higher average score and a 9.1% lead in OpenCL. However, this aggregate hides the GT 730M's strengths. The NVIDIA part offers dramatically better pixel throughput, more shading units, dedicated memory, and much lower power draw. The P4600's win comes from a higher boost clock and possibly better OpenCL driver optimization, but it lacks a Vulkan result and trails in every raw throughput metric.

Users with workloads that rely on OpenCL compute — such as certain productivity or media applications — should consider the P4600, as its 3389 score outperforms the GT 730M's 3107 by a clear margin. Those prioritizing gaming or any fill-rate-bound graphics work should favor the GT 730M, whose 5.800 GPixel/s pixel rate and 16 ROPs are more than double the Intel part's capabilities. The GT 730M's 33 W TDP also makes it the better choice for thermally constrained laptops.

The GT 730M's Vulkan score of 3524, which exceeds its own OpenCL score, signals better performance under modern APIs. With Vulkan 1.2.175 support and OpenGL 4.6, it has a longer software relevance window than the P4600's Vulkan 1.0 and OpenGL 4.3. For users who care about driver maturity and API support, NVIDIA has the edge. For pure compute benchmarks, Intel surprises with a win despite far fewer execution resources.

In practical terms, the P4600 is a capable integrated solution for light workloads, while the GT 730M is a modest discrete GPU that trades some compute efficiency for substantially better graphics throughput. The data does not support a universal winner — it is a trade-off between compute performance and graphics capability, with power efficiency favoring NVIDIA. Both are end-of-life parts, so the choice depends entirely on the specific workload and the system they are installed in.