Intel HD Graphics P4600 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Comparison

Intel HD Graphics P4600 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 are both end-of-life products, but they serve fundamentally different purposes. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy: the GTX 650 wins the only direct benchmark comparison, but the P4600 holds its own in specific contexts. The GTX 650 delivers 34.1% higher raw compute performance in OpenCL (4545 vs 3389), yet the P4600’s integrated nature and system-dependent memory mean its real-world positioning is about capability within constraints, not outright speed. This analysis breaks down where each component wins, what separates their architectures, and who should choose which based strictly on the benchmark data.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 is the undisputed performance winner in this matchup. In the sole head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 650 scores 4545 against the P4600’s 3389, a 25.4% lead. This advantage is consistent with its dedicated hardware design: 384 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs give it a massive resource advantage over the P4600’s 160 shading units, 20 TMUs, and just 2 ROPs. The GTX 650 also has dedicated GDDR5 memory with 80.00 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the P4600 relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth that is system dependent. For any workload that stresses raw fill rates or texture throughput, the GTX 650 wins decisively. Its pixel rate of 8.464 GPixel/s is 3.5x higher than the P4600’s 2.400 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 33.86 GTexel/s outpaces the P4600’s 24.00 GTexel/s by 41.1%.

The Intel HD Graphics P4600 wins in efficiency of integration, not performance. It is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a 22 nm process node from Intel’s own foundry, compared to the GTX 650’s 28 nm TSMC process. The P4600’s 84 W TDP is higher than the GTX 650’s 65 W, but the P4600 requires no power connectors and no dedicated slot—it runs off the motherboard’s Ring Bus interface. The GTX 650, by contrast, needs a single-slot physical footprint, a 1x 6-pin power connector, a suggested 250 W power supply, and a PCIe 3.0 x16 slot. The P4600 also has a higher DirectX support level at 12 (11_1) versus the GTX 650’s 12 (11_0), though the GTX 650 counters with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.175 support against the P4600’s OpenGL 4.3 and Vulkan 1.0. In terms of API versatility for modern titles, the GTX 650 is more future-proof, but the P4600’s integration means it wins in systems where adding a discrete GPU is not an option.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is stark. The Intel P4600 is built on the Haswell GT2 chip using Generation 7.5 architecture, manufactured on a 22 nm process at Intel’s foundry. It is part of the HD Graphics-W (Haswell) generation, with no dedicated memory—everything is system shared, including bus width and bandwidth. Its compute resources are modest: 160 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 2 ROPs, yielding 384.0 GFLOPS of FP32 performance. The GTX 650, in contrast, uses the GK106 chip based on Kepler architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 11.5M / mm². Its 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs produce 812.5 GFLOPS of FP32—more than double the P4600’s output. The GTX 650’s memory subsystem is dedicated: 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 80.00 GB/s bandwidth. The P4600’s memory is system dependent, which means its performance scales with the host system’s RAM speed and capacity—a variable the GTX 650 does not face.

Clock behavior also differs. The P4600 has a base clock of 350 MHz and a boost clock of 1200 MHz, while the GTX 650’s clock data is not listed in the pack (only its memory clock of 1250 MHz, or 5 Gbps effective, is given). The P4600’s boost clock is high for an integrated part, but its low base clock and shared memory limit sustained throughput. The GTX 650’s dedicated memory and higher shading unit count mean its effective throughput is far more predictable. The API support gap is notable: the P4600 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.3, and Vulkan 1.0, while the GTX 650 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The GTX 650’s newer OpenGL and Vulkan versions give it an edge in modern applications that leverage those APIs, though the P4600’s slightly higher DirectX feature level is a minor counterpoint. Physically, the GTX 650 is a 147 mm (5.8 inches) single-slot card with 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the P4600’s display outputs are motherboard dependent.

The Verdict

For any user needing discrete graphics performance, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 is the clear choice. Benchmark results show it leads by 25.4% in OpenCL (4545 vs 3389), and its 34.1% higher FP32 throughput (812.5 GFLOPS vs 384.0 GFLOPS) translates to faster rendering, better texture filtering, and smoother gameplay in supported titles. The GTX 650 also has a higher percentile ranking at 22% versus the P4600’s 20%, and its average benchmark score of 3823 exceeds the P4600’s 3389 by 12.8%. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce MX110, scores 3834, a mere 0.3% difference, placing the GTX 650 in a competitive band for entry-level discrete GPUs.

The Intel HD Graphics P4600 is for systems where a discrete GPU is impossible or unnecessary. It is an IGP with no power connectors, no slot width, and system-shared memory—ideal for office desktops or embedded systems where the motherboard’s Ring Bus is the only option. Its 84 W TDP is higher than the GTX 650’s 65 W, but that figure covers the entire graphics subsystem integrated into the CPU, not a separate card. The P4600’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740, scores 3431, only 1.2% higher, indicating the P4600 is competitive with low-end discrete cards from its era. However, its 2 ROPs and 2.400 GPixel/s pixel rate are severe bottlenecks for any resolution beyond basic desktop use. For gaming, video editing, or GPU-accelerated compute, the GTX 650 is the only rational pick. For basic display output in a constrained chassis, the P4600 suffices.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 scores 4545 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Intel HD Graphics P4600 scores 3389. The GTX 650 wins by 25.4% based on the head-to-head delta of -25.4% for the P4600.

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

A: The GTX 650 has 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 80.00 GB/s bandwidth. The P4600 uses system-shared memory with system-shared bus width and system-dependent bandwidth, meaning its performance varies with the host system’s RAM.

Q: What are the API support differences?

A: The P4600 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.3, and Vulkan 1.0. The GTX 650 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The GTX 650 has newer OpenGL and Vulkan versions, while the P4600 has a slightly higher DirectX feature level.

Q: Which has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The GTX 650 has a pixel rate of 8.464 GPixel/s, which is 3.5x higher than the P4600’s 2.400 GPixel/s. This makes the GTX 650 significantly better for resolution-heavy workloads.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No, both are end-of-life. The P4600 was released on 2013-05-31 and the GTX 650 on 2013-11-26.

Q: What are their physical requirements?

A: The GTX 650 is a single-slot card measuring 147 mm (5.8 inches), requiring 1x 6-pin power connector and a suggested 250 W power supply. The P4600 is an IGP with no slot width, no power connectors, and motherboard-dependent display outputs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, where the GTX 650 scores 4545 against the P4600’s 3389. This 25.4% delta is the single most important number in this matchup. It confirms that the GTX 650’s dedicated memory and 2.1x shading unit count (384 vs 160) translate into real compute advantage. The GTX 650 also wins on FP32 throughput: 812.5 GFLOPS versus 384.0 GFLOPS, a 111.6% lead. Texture rate favors the GTX 650 at 33.86 GTexel/s versus 24.00 GTexel/s, a 41.1% edge. The pixel rate gap is even larger: 8.464 GPixel/s versus 2.400 GPixel/s, a 252.7% difference.

The P4600’s only wins are architectural. It has a smaller process node (22 nm vs 28 nm), a higher DirectX feature level (12 (11_1) vs 12 (11_0)), and a lower average benchmark score gap to its nearest rival. The P4600’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740, scores 3431, just 1.2% higher, while the GTX 650’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce MX110, scores 3834, only 0.3% higher. This suggests the P4600 is closer to its competitive band than the GTX 650 is, but that band is lower overall. The GTX 650’s average benchmark score of 3823 places it in the 22nd percentile of all GPUs, while the P4600’s 3389 places it in the 20th percentile. The GTX 650 also has Vulkan and Metal benchmark scores (4524 and 2400, respectively) that the P4600 lacks entirely, indicating broader API support in real-world testing.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel HD Graphics P4600 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 |

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

| Chip | Haswell GT2 | GK106 |

| Architecture | Generation 7.5 | Kepler |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not listed | 2,540 million |

| Die Size | Not listed | 221 mm² |

| Transistor Density | Not listed | 11.5M / mm² |

| Shading Units | 160 | 384 |

| TMUs | 20 | 32 |

| ROPs | 2 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 2.400 GPixel/s | 8.464 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 24.00 GTexel/s | 33.86 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 384.0 GFLOPS | 812.5 GFLOPS |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 1024 MB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 80.00 GB/s |

| TDP | 84 W | 65 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Motherboard Dependent | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 |

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

| OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.0 | 1.2.175 |

| Length | Not listed | 147 mm (5.8 inches) |

| Release Date | 2013-05-31 | 2013-11-26 |