Intel HD Graphics P530 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data presents a fascinating split between these two end-of-life mobile graphics solutions. In the two tests conducted, each GPU claims one victory, but the margins tell very different stories about their respective strengths.

The most decisive result comes in the Geekbench OpenCL test. The Intel HD Graphics P530 delivers a score of 4549, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M manages only 2680. This translates to a 69.7% advantage for the Intel part—a substantial gap that suggests the integrated solution is far more capable in compute workloads that leverage this particular API. The data shows the P530's OpenCL performance is not merely competitive; it is dominant against the older NVIDIA discrete GPU.

However, the tables turn when examining Geekbench Vulkan results. Here, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M scores 4875 against the Intel HD Graphics P530's 4571. The delta of -6.2% (from Intel's perspective) means NVIDIA holds a notable, though not overwhelming, lead in this modern graphics API. The GT 645M's advantage in Vulkan indicates that its Kepler architecture retains relevance in newer rendering paths, even if its raw compute throughput in OpenCL lags significantly.

Looking at the broader benchmark picture, the average scores across all recorded tests show Intel at 4560 and NVIDIA at 4411. This places the Intel HD Graphics P530 approximately 3.4% ahead in overall average performance. Both GPUs occupy the 26th percentile among all GPUs in the database, meaning they sit at the same tier of overall capability despite their divergent API-specific results.

The nearest rival data reinforces this mixed picture. The Intel P530's closest competitor is the AMD Radeon RX 560, with an average score of 4569—a delta of just -0.2%, effectively a tie. The NVIDIA GT 645M's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce 930M at 4388, where the GT 645M leads by 0.5%. These margins are razor-thin, indicating that both parts operate in a performance band where minor architectural differences dictate outcomes.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P530 has an average benchmark score of 4560 across all recorded tests, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M's 4411. This gives Intel a lead of approximately 3.4% in overall average performance.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in the Vulkan graphics API?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M scores 4875, while the Intel HD Graphics P530 scores 4571. The NVIDIA part leads by 6.2%, demonstrating better Vulkan performance.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap in the head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The largest margin is in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the Intel HD Graphics P530 scores 4549 against the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M's 2680—a 69.7% advantage for Intel.

Q: Are these GPUs considered competitive with modern parts?

A: Both GPUs sit at the 26th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Their nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 560 (4569 average score, -0.2% delta from Intel) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 (4335 average score, 1.8% delta from GT 645M), indicating they operate in a performance band far below contemporary high-end offerings.

Q: What is the difference in shading unit counts?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M has 384 shading units, while the Intel HD Graphics P530 has 192. Despite having half the shading units, Intel's part achieves higher OpenCL scores.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M has a pixel rate of 6.240 GPixel/s, compared to the Intel HD Graphics P530's 3.000 GPixel/s. NVIDIA's part is more than twice as fast in this specific metric.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is stark, reflecting their very different design philosophies and manufacturing timelines. The Intel HD Graphics P530 is built on a 14 nm+ process at Intel's own foundry, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M uses a 28 nm process from TSMC. This process node difference is significant—Intel's newer node allows for higher transistor density despite the integrated nature of the design. The Intel chip, codenamed Skylake GT2, has a die size of 123 mm², while NVIDIA's GK107 chip measures 118 mm². Interestingly, the NVIDIA part packs 1,270 million transistors into its smaller die, yielding a transistor density of 10.8M per mm²; the Intel P530's transistor count is not specified in the data.

The Intel HD Graphics P530 belongs to the Generation 9.0 architecture family, specifically the HD Graphics-W (Skylake) generation. Its 192 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 3 ROPs are complemented by a base clock of 350 MHz and a boost clock of 1000 MHz. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M, based on the Kepler architecture from the GeForce 600M generation, offers 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs—exactly double the Intel part in each category. Its clocks are lower in boost terms (780 MHz boost versus 1000 MHz), but its base clock of 709 MHz is more than double Intel's base.

Memory configurations diverge completely. The Intel P530 uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth, meaning its performance scales with the host system's RAM. The NVIDIA GT 645M has a dedicated 2 GB DDR3 frame buffer on a 128-bit bus, providing 28.80 GB/s of fixed bandwidth. This dedicated memory is a traditional advantage for discrete GPUs, yet the benchmark data shows it does not guarantee compute superiority.

API support reveals generational differences. The Intel P530 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA GT 645M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. Intel's newer Vulkan support (1.3 vs 1.2.175) may explain its competitive Vulkan performance despite lower raw specs. The Intel part also lists FP16 capability at 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while NVIDIA's FP16 data is null—suggesting the Kepler architecture lacks dedicated FP16 throughput.

Power consumption differs substantially: the Intel P530 has a 15 W TDP, while the NVIDIA GT 645M draws 32 W. This 17 W difference is meaningful for mobile platforms, though the GT 645M's IGP slot width and lack of power connectors indicate it was designed as a low-power discrete option. The bus interface also differs—Intel uses a Ring Bus (integrated into the CPU package), while NVIDIA uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

The Intel part's display outputs are motherboard-dependent, while NVIDIA's are portable-device-dependent, reflecting their intended deployment contexts. Both GPUs are end-of-life products, with Intel released on 2015-08-31 and NVIDIA on 2012-09-30—a three-year gap that explains some architectural advantages for Intel.

The Verdict

The data presents a nuanced recommendation scenario. For compute-heavy workloads utilizing OpenCL, the Intel HD Graphics P530 is the clear choice. Its 69.7% lead in that benchmark is too significant to ignore, and its higher average score (4560 vs 4411) confirms consistent overall superiority despite the NVIDIA part's discrete memory advantage.

However, for scenarios prioritizing Vulkan performance, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M holds a 6.2% edge. Its 4875 Vulkan score versus Intel's 4571 suggests better driver optimization or architectural efficiency in that specific API. The GT 645M also offers dedicated 2 GB memory with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth, which may benefit texture-heavy applications that the OpenCL and Vulkan tests do not fully capture.

The 3.4% average score advantage for Intel, combined with its newer architecture (Generation 9.0 vs Kepler), higher Vulkan API support (1.3 vs 1.2.175), and lower TDP (15 W vs 32 W), makes it the more future-proof choice for mixed workloads. The Intel part achieves this with half the shading units (192 vs 384) and half the TMUs (16 vs 32), demonstrating the efficiency gains of its 14 nm+ process over NVIDIA's 28 nm node.

Yet the GT 645M's superior pixel rate (6.240 GPixel/s vs 3.000 GPixel/s) and texture rate (24.96 GTexel/s vs 16.00 GTexel/s) indicate it may handle rasterization-heavy tasks better, even if compute benchmarks do not reflect this. Its DDR3 memory at 1800 Mbps effective is slower than modern standards but provides deterministic bandwidth that system-shared memory cannot guarantee.

For users running diverse applications across multiple APIs, the Intel HD Graphics P530's higher average score and better OpenCL performance make it the safer default recommendation. For those specifically targeting Vulkan or requiring dedicated frame buffer memory, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M remains a viable option despite its older architecture. The 26th percentile ranking for both parts signals they are entry-level solutions, and the choice ultimately hinges on workload composition rather than raw capability.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel HD Graphics P530 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M |

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

| Manufacturer | Intel | NVIDIA |

| Chip | Skylake GT2 | GK107 |

| Architecture | Generation 9.0 | Kepler |

| Generation | HD Graphics-W (Skylake) | GeForce 600M |

| Process Node | 14 nm+ | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 118 mm² |

| Transistors | Not specified | 1,270 million |

| Base Clock | 350 MHz | 709 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1000 MHz | 780 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 28.80 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 192 | 384 |

| TMUs | 16 | 32 |

| ROPs | 3 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 3.000 GPixel/s | 6.240 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 16.00 GTexel/s | 24.96 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 384.0 GFLOPS | 599.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1) | Not specified |

| TDP | 15 W | 32 W |

| Bus Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.2.175 |

| Release Date | 2015-08-31 | 2012-09-30 |

| Predecessor | Not specified | GeForce 500M |

| Successor | Not specified | GeForce 700M |