Intel HD Graphics P530 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX110 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly in favor of the Intel HD Graphics P530. Across the two recorded Geekbench tests, the Intel part wins both, giving it a 2-0 record in direct head-to-head comparisons. The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 does not take a single victory in any recorded benchmark.

The largest margin comes in the Geekbench Vulkan test. The Intel HD Graphics P530 scores 4571, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 manages 3413. That is a 33.9% advantage for the Intel solution, a decisive gap in API-specific workloads. Vulkan is a low-level graphics API, and the data indicates the Generation 9.0 architecture handles it far more effectively than the Maxwell-based NVIDIA part.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the margin shrinks considerably but still favors Intel. The HD Graphics P530 posts 4549 against 4255 for the MX110, a 6.9% lead. OpenCL is a compute-oriented workload, and while the NVIDIA part has more shading units and a higher raw FP32 rate, the recorded score shows Intel's integrated solution still comes out ahead.

Looking at average benchmark scores across all recorded tests, the Intel part averages 4560, while the NVIDIA part averages 3834. That is an 18.9% gap in overall average performance, reinforcing that the HD Graphics P530 is the stronger performer in this pairing.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 does hold advantages in certain architectural specifications. It has 256 shading units versus 192 for Intel, a 64-bit memory bus with 40.10 GB/s of dedicated GDDR5 bandwidth, and a higher boost clock of 1006 MHz. However, these hardware advantages do not translate into benchmark victories. The data shows the Intel part wins where it matters in measured performance.

For users prioritizing Vulkan performance, the choice is unambiguous. The 33.9% lead in that test is the single largest difference between the two. For OpenCL workloads, the gap is smaller but still favors Intel. No recorded workload favors the NVIDIA GeForce MX110.

The Verdict

The Intel HD Graphics P530 is the superior choice based on recorded benchmark data. It wins both head-to-head tests and holds a higher average benchmark score across all measurements. The 26th percentile ranking among all GPUs for Intel versus 23rd for NVIDIA confirms the overall positioning.

Users who run Vulkan-based applications should select the Intel HD Graphics P530 without hesitation. The 33.9% performance advantage in that API is substantial and likely to be noticeable in real-world scenarios. The OpenCL gap of 6.9% is smaller, but it still points in the same direction.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 does offer a dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory pool with 40.10 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the Intel part's system-shared memory. For workloads that are sensitive to memory latency or bandwidth, this could matter in ways not fully captured by the recorded Geekbench scores. However, the benchmark data as recorded does not show any test where the MX110 wins.

The MX110 has a higher TDP at 30 W versus 15 W for the Intel part. This suggests the NVIDIA solution may be intended for slightly more robust thermal envelopes, but the performance data does not justify the additional power draw based on measured results.

Production status for both is end-of-life, so neither is a forward-looking purchase. Between the two, the Intel HD Graphics P530 delivers better recorded performance in every measured category. The verdict is straightforward: Intel wins on performance, NVIDIA wins on dedicated memory specifications, but the benchmarks favor Intel.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench Vulkan test is where the Intel HD Graphics P530 delivers its most emphatic statement. Scoring 4571 against 3413, the Intel part leads by 33.9%. This is not a marginal difference; it is a category-level gap. Vulkan is increasingly common in modern game engines and compute applications, so this delta carries practical weight.

The Geekbench OpenCL test is closer but still favors Intel. The HD Graphics P530 scores 4549, while the GeForce MX110 scores 4255. The 6.9% advantage is modest but consistent with the overall trend. Notably, the Intel part's OpenCL score (4549) is nearly identical to its Vulkan score (4571), showing consistent performance across both APIs. The NVIDIA part, by contrast, drops from 4255 in OpenCL to 3413 in Vulkan, a 19.8% decline in relative performance.

Comparing average scores, the Intel part's 4560 average is close to its individual test results, indicating stability. The NVIDIA part's 3834 average is dragged down by its weak Vulkan showing. In the nearest rivals data, the Intel HD Graphics P530 sits within 1.3% of the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (4621) and 1.2% above the AMD FirePro W4190M (4505). The NVIDIA GeForce MX110, meanwhile, sits within 1.6% of the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 (3898) and 1.1% above the Intel UHD Graphics 710 (3792).

The biggest win for Intel is the Vulkan test, where the 33.9% margin dwarfs any other comparison in this pairing. The biggest win for NVIDIA, if it can be called that, is the OpenCL test where the deficit is only 6.9% rather than 33.9%. No recorded benchmark shows the MX110 ahead.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P530 averages 4560, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 averages 3834. Intel leads by 18.9%.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap between the two?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the Intel HD Graphics P530 scores 4571 versus 3413 for the NVIDIA GeForce MX110, a 33.9% advantage for Intel.

Q: Does the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 win any benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head record is 2 wins for Intel and 0 wins for NVIDIA across the two recorded Geekbench tests.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P530 uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus with 40.10 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their shading unit counts compare?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 has 256 shading units, while the Intel HD Graphics P530 has 192. Despite fewer shading units, Intel wins both recorded benchmarks.

Q: What is the production status of these GPUs?

A: Both the Intel HD Graphics P530 and the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 are listed as end-of-life products in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel HD Graphics P530 is built on the Generation 9.0 architecture, specifically the Skylake GT2 chip. It uses a 14 nm+ process node fabricated by Intel. The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 uses the Maxwell architecture with the GM108S chip, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC.

The process node difference is significant: 14 nm+ for Intel versus 28 nm for NVIDIA. This explains why the Intel part achieves its performance with a 15 W TDP while the NVIDIA part requires 30 W. The Intel die size is 123 mm², while the NVIDIA die is 77 mm². However, the NVIDIA chip packs 1,020 million transistors versus no transistor count listed for Intel, giving NVIDIA a transistor density of 13.2M per mm².

The Intel part integrates 192 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 3 raster output pipelines. The NVIDIA part has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. NVIDIA's higher ROP count contributes to its pixel rate of 8.048 GPixel/s, more than double Intel's 3.000 GPixel/s. Texture rates are nearly identical: 16.10 GTexel/s for NVIDIA versus 16.00 GTexel/s for Intel.

Raw compute figures favor NVIDIA in FP32: 515.1 GFLOPS versus 384.0 GFLOPS for Intel. However, Intel lists FP16 support at 768.0 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while NVIDIA does not list FP16 capabilities. The benchmark results show that raw specification advantages do not always translate to measured performance.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. Intel uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while NVIDIA has dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus delivering 40.10 GB/s. The bus interface also differs: Intel uses a Ring Bus, while NVIDIA uses PCIe 3.0 x4.

API support shows interesting contrasts. Intel supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. NVIDIA supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. NVIDIA's Vulkan 1.4 is a newer API version, yet the Intel part scores 33.9% higher in the Vulkan benchmark. This suggests the implementation quality matters more than the API version number.

Specification Differences

The clock speeds differ notably. The Intel HD Graphics P530 has a base clock of 350 MHz and a boost clock of 1000 MHz. The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 starts higher at 978 MHz base and boosts to 1006 MHz. NVIDIA's memory clock is listed at 1253 MHz with 5 Gbps effective, while Intel's memory clock is system-shared.

Power consumption is a clear differentiator. The Intel part is rated at 15 W TDP, while the NVIDIA part draws 30 W. Both are IGP slot width, meaning neither uses a discrete expansion slot. NVIDIA lists no power connectors required, and Intel lists none as well.

Memory specifications are the most dramatic difference. Intel has system-shared memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth. NVIDIA has 2 GB GDDR5, a 64-bit bus, and 40.10 GB/s bandwidth. This is the MX110's primary specification advantage.

Display outputs differ in dependency. Intel's are motherboard-dependent, while NVIDIA's are portable-device-dependent. This reflects their target platforms: Intel for desktop motherboards with integrated graphics, NVIDIA for laptops.

The release dates are about two years apart. Intel's HD Graphics P530 was released in August 2015, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 came in November 2017. Both are now end-of-life. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP, predecessor, or successor in the database.

Process technology separates them clearly: Intel uses 14 nm+ from its own foundry, while NVIDIA uses 28 nm from TSMC. The die sizes are 123 mm² for Intel and 77 mm² for NVIDIA, with NVIDIA listing 1,020 million transistors and a density of 13.2M per mm². Intel does not list transistor count or density.

Shader configuration favors NVIDIA: 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs versus Intel's 192 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 3 ROPs. Pixel rate is 8.048 GPixel/s for NVIDIA versus 3.000 GPixel/s for Intel. Texture rate is nearly tied at 16.10 versus 16.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 515.1 GFLOPS for NVIDIA versus 384.0 GFLOPS for Intel. Despite these specification advantages, the benchmark record favors Intel in both tests.