GPU Comparison

Intel HD Graphics P4600 and NVIDIA GeForce MX110 are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions, but they sit in different performance tiers. The benchmark data is unambiguous: the MX110 is the faster GPU, though the P4600 competes more closely than its integrated status might suggest. This analysis breaks down the head-to-head results, architectural differences, and use-case scenarios strictly from the provided data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it delivers a clear verdict. The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 scores 4255 points, while the Intel HD Graphics P4600 scores 3389 points. That is a delta of -20.4% for the Intel part, meaning the MX110 outperforms the P4600 by roughly a fifth in raw compute throughput. This is not a marginal gap; it is a decisive lead that places the two GPUs in different performance brackets.

Context from the nearest rivals underscores this separation. The P4600’s average benchmark score is 3389, placing it just 1.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 (3431) and 1.3% behind the NVIDIA Quadro 2000M (3434). It also edges out the Intel HD Graphics 530 (3332) by 1.7% and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M (3316) by 2.2%. The MX110, by contrast, averages 3834 across its two benchmark runs (OpenCL and Vulkan). Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 (3823), which it beats by a slim 0.3%, and it also leads the Intel UHD Graphics 710 (3792) by 1.1%. However, it trails the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics (3883) by 1.2% and the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 (3898) by 1.6%.

The practical takeaway from the head-to-head is that the MX110’s 20.4% advantage in OpenCL is consistent with its higher percentile ranking. The MX110 sits at the 23rd percentile of all GPUs, while the P4600 sits at the 20th. That three-percentile gap reflects a real, measurable difference in compute capability. In single-threaded or lightly threaded workloads, the gap might feel smaller, but in any OpenCL-accelerated task, the MX110 will finish measurably ahead.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel HD Graphics P4600 is built on the Haswell GT2 chip, using Intel’s Generation 7.5 architecture. It is fabricated on a 22 nm process at Intel’s own foundry. The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 uses the GM108S chip, based on NVIDIA’s Maxwell architecture, and is manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. Intel’s newer 22 nm node gives it a transistor density advantage in principle, but the MX110 compensates with a larger, more compute-focused design.

The MX110’s chip contains 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The P4600’s transistor count and die size are not listed, so a direct density comparison is impossible from the data. However, the architectural intent is clear: Maxwell is designed for efficient parallel compute, while Haswell GT2 is a modest integrated solution.

Memory architecture differs drastically. The P4600 uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The MX110 has dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 40.10 GB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). This dedicated memory is a critical advantage for the MX110 because it does not compete with the CPU for bandwidth. The P4600’s shared memory arrangement means its performance is heavily influenced by the rest of the system, a factor that can cause variability in benchmark results.

The compute pipelines also diverged. The P4600 has 160 shading units, 20 texture mapping units (TMUs), and only 2 render output units (ROPs). The MX110 has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. More shading units give the MX110 a raw shader throughput advantage, while the higher ROP count helps with pixel fill and memory-intensive operations. The P4600 has more TMUs, which helps in texture-heavy scenarios, but its ROP count is a severe bottleneck for final framebuffer output.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The P4600 runs at a 350 MHz base clock with a 1200 MHz boost. The MX110 runs at a 978 MHz base clock and a 1006 MHz boost. NVIDIA’s clocks are far higher at base, and while the P4600 has a higher boost ceiling relative to its base, the MX110’s sustained clocks are consistently above the P4600’s maximum. This is a major reason for the MX110’s performance lead.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 wins the only head-to-head benchmark, and its architectural profile suggests it wins in most compute and gaming scenarios. The 20.4% OpenCL lead, combined with dedicated GDDR5 memory and 8 ROPs, makes it the stronger choice for any workload that relies on shader throughput, pixel fill, or sustained memory bandwidth. The MX110’s 256 shading units and 40.10 GB/s bandwidth are well-suited for modern game rendering, video encoding, and GPU-accelerated compute tasks. Its higher percentile ranking (23rd vs. 20th) reinforces this.

The Intel HD Graphics P4600 does have niche advantages. Its 20 TMUs exceed the MX110’s 16, which can help in texture-heavy workloads if memory bandwidth is not the limiting factor. Its 22 nm process node is newer than the MX110’s 28 nm, which could imply better power efficiency per transistor, though the P4600’s 84 W TDP is significantly higher than the MX110’s 30 W. The P4600 also supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.0, while the MX110 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.4. For API compatibility, the MX110 has the edge with Vulkan 1.4, but the P4600’s DirectX 12 (11_1) is a slight revision ahead of the MX110’s 11_0.

The P4600’s advantage is essentially limited to scenarios where its higher TMU count and slightly newer process node matter more than raw compute. In practice, that means very specific texture-bound workloads with minimal memory pressure. For general use, the MX110 is the clear winner. It has a higher average benchmark score (3834 vs. 3389), a higher percentile, and wins the direct comparison.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two GPUs differ, based on the the benchmark database.

| Specification | Intel HD Graphics P4600 | NVIDIA GeForce MX110 |

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

| Manufacturer | Intel | NVIDIA |

| Chip | Haswell GT2 | GM108S |

| Architecture | Generation 7.5 | Maxwell |

| Generation | HD Graphics-W (Haswell) | GeForce MX (1xx) |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not listed | 1,020 million |

| Die Size | Not listed | 77 mm² |

| Transistor Density | Not listed | 13.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 350 MHz | 978 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1200 MHz | 1006 MHz |

| Memory Clock | System Shared | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 40.10 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 160 | 256 |

| TMUs | 20 | 16 |

| ROPs | 2 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 2.400 GPixel/s | 8.048 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 24.00 GTexel/s | 16.10 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 384.0 GFLOPS | 515.1 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 84 W | 30 W |

| Bus Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 3.0 x4 |

| Display Outputs | Motherboard Dependent | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.0 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2013-05-31 | 2017-11-16 |

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 scores 4255, while the Intel HD Graphics P4600 scores 3389. The MX110 wins by 20.4%.

Q: How does the Intel HD Graphics P4600 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The P4600 averages 3389 points, placing it 1.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 (3431), 1.3% behind the NVIDIA Quadro 2000M (3434), 1.7% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics 530 (3332), and 2.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M (3316).

Q: What memory does each GPU use?

A: The P4600 uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The MX110 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, with 40.10 GB/s bandwidth and a 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) memory clock.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 has 256 shading units, compared to 160 on the Intel HD Graphics P4600. The MX110 also has 8 ROPs versus 2, though the P4600 has 20 TMUs versus 16.

Q: What are the TDP differences?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P4600 has a TDP of 84 W, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 has a TDP of 30 W. The MX110 is significantly more power-efficient.

Q: Which GPU has better API support?

A: The MX110 supports Vulkan 1.4 and OpenGL 4.6, while the P4600 supports Vulkan 1.0 and OpenGL 4.3. Both support DirectX 12, but the P4600 is at 11_1 and the MX110 is at 11_0.

The Verdict

Benchmark results indicate a clear winner. The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 outperforms the Intel HD Graphics P4600 by 20.4% in the only direct head-to-head test, and it holds a higher average score (3834 vs. 3389) and a higher percentile ranking (23rd vs. 20th). The MX110’s dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory, 256 shading units, and 8 ROPs give it a structural advantage that the P4600’s shared memory and 2 ROPs cannot overcome. Its 30 W TDP is also far more efficient than the P4600’s 84 W.

The Intel HD Graphics P4600 is not without merit. Its 20 TMUs exceed the MX110’s 16, and its 22 nm process node is newer than the MX110’s 28 nm. It also has a slightly newer DirectX feature level (11_1 vs. 11_0). However, these advantages do not translate into benchmark wins. The P4600’s 384.0 GFLOPS FP32 performance is substantially below the MX110’s 515.1 GFLOPS, and its 2.400 GPixel/s pixel rate is a fraction of the MX110’s 8.048 GPixel/s.

Who should choose which? Strictly from the data, the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 is the better choice for any user prioritizing compute performance, graphics rendering, or energy efficiency. Its higher scores and superior memory subsystem make it the more capable GPU in nearly every measurable way. The Intel HD Graphics P4600 is only viable for users who need its higher TMU count for texture-bound workloads and can tolerate its higher power draw and shared memory constraints. For everyone else, the MX110 is the verdict.