Intel HD Graphics P530 vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000D Comparison

Intel HD Graphics P530 and NVIDIA Quadro 2000D are both end-of-life graphics products, but they represent fundamentally different design philosophies and eras. The Intel part is an integrated GPU built into Skylake processors, while the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D is a discrete workstation card from the Fermi generation. Benchmark data from the database shows the Intel HD Graphics P530 holds a clear performance advantage in the recorded compute test, despite its integrated nature and much lower power envelope.

Architecture Differences

The Intel HD Graphics P530 is built on Intel's Generation 9.0 architecture, using the Skylake GT2 chip. It is manufactured on a 14 nm+ process at Intel's own foundry, with a die size of 123 mm². The architecture is designed to share system memory and operate as an integrated GPU, connected via the Ring Bus interface. This part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, making it modern in API support even though the hardware itself is from the Skylake era.

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D uses the Fermi architecture with the GF106 chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 40 nm process. The die is significantly larger at 238 mm², and the chip contains 1,170 million transistors. The transistor density is listed at 4.9M per mm², which is comparatively low due to the older and less dense manufacturing process. The Quadro 2000D supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support recorded in the database. This is a notable API gap when compared directly to the Intel part.

The Intel HD Graphics P530 has 192 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and only 3 raster output units. The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D also has 192 shading units, which is a direct match, but it doubles the texture units to 32 and provides 16 raster output units. These differences in fixed-function hardware matter for fill-rate and texture-heavy workloads. The Intel part records a pixel rate of 3.000 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 16.00 GTexel/s, while the Quadro 2000D achieves 5.000 GPixel/s and 20.00 GTexel/s. Despite the Quadro's advantage in these specific throughput metrics, its overall compute score in the database is lower, which suggests the Intel architecture is more efficient in general compute workloads.

The Intel HD Graphics P530 supports FP16 compute at 768.0 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the Quadro 2000D has no recorded FP16 capability. In FP32, the Intel part delivers 384.0 GFLOPS, and the Quadro 2000D delivers 480.0 GFLOPS. The Quadro has a theoretical FP32 advantage, but the recorded benchmark results tell a different story in practice.

The Intel part is an IGP with no dedicated memory. It uses system shared memory, and its bandwidth is listed as system dependent. The Quadro 2000D has 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with 41.60 GB/s of bandwidth. Memory clock for the Quadro is 650 MHz base, translating to 2.6 Gbps effective. The Intel HD Graphics P530 has no dedicated memory clock; it relies entirely on the host system's memory configuration.

Power and physical design also differ sharply. The Intel HD Graphics P530 has a TDP of 15 W and is an IGP with no slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The Quadro 2000D has a 62 W TDP, is a single-slot card, requires no power connectors, but the database lists a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Quadro measures 178 mm in length (7 inches) and 111 mm in height (4.4 inches). Display outputs are motherboard dependent on the Intel side, while the Quadro 2000D provides 2x DVI outputs.

The release dates are far apart. The Intel HD Graphics P530 launched on 2015-08-31, while the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D launched on 2011-10-04. The Quadro 2000D has a recorded predecessor, the Quadro FX Tesla, and a successor, the Quadro Kepler. The Intel part has no predecessor or successor listed in the database. The Quadro 2000D also has a launch MSRP of 599 USD, which can be noted as a historical data point, but the Intel part has no MSRP recorded.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The Intel HD Graphics P530 is on a 14 nm+ process, while the Quadro 2000D is on a 40 nm process. The Intel die is 123 mm², the Quadro die is 238 mm². Transistor count is not recorded for the Intel part, but the Quadro has 1,170 million transistors and a density of 4.9M per mm².

Clock behavior is fundamentally different. The Intel HD Graphics P530 has a base clock of 350 MHz and a boost clock of 1000 MHz. The Quadro 2000D has no base or boost clock recorded; only its memory clock of 650 MHz (2.6 Gbps effective) is listed. The Intel GPU is dynamic and can scale its clock, while the Quadro appears to run at fixed clocks, though the database does not provide the core clock figures.

Memory configurations are entirely different: the Intel part uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, while the Quadro has 1024 MB of GDDR5, a 128-bit bus, and 41.60 GB/s of dedicated bandwidth. The Intel part has 192 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 3 ROPs. The Quadro has 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Pixel rate favors the Quadro at 5.000 GPixel/s versus 3.000 GPixel/s, and texture rate favors the Quadro at 20.00 GTexel/s versus 16.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute favors the Quadro at 480.0 GFLOPS versus 384.0 GFLOPS, while FP16 is only present on the Intel part at 768.0 GFLOPS.

TDP is 15 W for the Intel part versus 62 W for the Quadro. The Intel part is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface; the Quadro is a single-slot PCIe 2.0 x16 card. The Quadro has 2x DVI outputs; the Intel part's outputs are motherboard dependent. API support: both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6, but the Intel part supports Vulkan 1.3 while the Quadro has no Vulkan support. The Quadro supports a more limited DirectX 12 feature level of 11_0, while the Intel part supports 12_1.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance according to the database?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P530 scores 4549 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D scores 3930. That is a 15.8% delta in favor of the Intel part.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D have any advantages in throughput metrics?

A: Yes. The Quadro 2000D has higher pixel rate at 5.000 GPixel/s versus 3.000 GPixel/s, higher texture rate at 20.00 GTexel/s versus 16.00 GTexel/s, and higher FP32 compute at 480.0 GFLOPS versus 384.0 GFLOPS. It also has more TMUs (32 versus 16) and more ROPs (16 versus 3).

Q: Which GPU has better API support?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P530 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support recorded.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P530 has a TDP of 15 W and is an integrated GPU with no power connectors. The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D has a TDP of 62 W, is a single-slot card with no power connectors, and the database lists a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: What are the memory configurations of each GPU?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P530 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 41.60 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: When was each GPU released, and what is the production status?

A:** The Intel HD Graphics P530 was released on 2015-08-31. The NVIDIA Quadro 12 2000D was released on 2011-10-04. Both are marked as end-of-life in the database. The Quadro 2000D has a launch MSRP of 599 USD, but the Intel part has no MSRP recorded.

Q: Which GPU sits higher in the overall GPU percentile ranking?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P530 is in the 26th percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D is in the 23rd percentile. Their average benchmark scores are 4560 and 3930 respectively.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous in compute performance: the Intel HD Graphics P530 wins the only recorded head-to-head benchmark. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Intel part scores 4549 against the Quadro 2000D's 3930, a 15.8% advantage. The Intel part also holds a higher percentile ranking at 26 versus 23. For any workload captured by this benchmark, the Intel HD Graphics P530 is the stronger choice.

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D is not without merit. It offers dedicated GDDR5 memory with 41.60 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a significant advantage over system shared memory in the Intel part. It also has higher pixel and texture rates, and more ROPs and TMUs. These characteristics could matter for specific legacy applications that rely on fill rate or texture throughput, but the recorded data shows that these theoretical advantages do not translate into a higher OpenCL score.

For a user choosing between these two end-of-life products, the Intel HD Graphics P530 is the better pick for general compute workloads, API compatibility, and power efficiency. The Quadro 2000D might be considered only if the workload requires dedicated memory or if the system lacks a modern Intel processor with the integrated GPU. The launch MSRP of the Quadro 2000D was 599 USD, but that historical price does not change the performance outcome.

The Intel part is also far more efficient. At 15 W TDP versus 62 W, it delivers higher benchmark scores while consuming less than a quarter of the power. It is an IGP, so it requires no additional slot, no power connectors, and no PSU upgrade. The Quadro 2000D is a single-slot card that, while not requiring power connectors, does list a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records one head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The Intel HD Graphics P530 scores 4549, and the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D scores 3930. The delta is 15.8% in favor of the Intel part. This is the only direct comparison available, and it is decisive.

The Intel HD Graphics P530's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 4560, which aligns closely with its Geekbench OpenCL score of 4549. It also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 4571, though the Quadro 2000D has no Vulkan result recorded, so that test cannot be compared directly. The Intel part's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon RX 560 at 4569 (delta of -0.2%), the AMD Radeon R5 M230 at 4577 (delta of -0.4%), the AMD FirePro W4190M at 4505 (delta of 1.2%), and the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M at 4621 (delta of -1.3%). These numbers place the Intel HD Graphics P530 in a competitive band with much larger discrete GPUs, despite being an integrated part.

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D has an average benchmark score of 3930, which is its only recorded score. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D at 3919 (delta of 0.3%), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M at 3953 (delta of -0.6%), the AMD Radeon R5 M420 at 3956 (delta of -0.7%), and the NVIDIA GeForce 830M at 3957 (delta of -0.7%). The Quadro 2000D sits at the low end of that group, slightly behind most of its nearest rivals and only narrowly ahead of the Quadro K2000D.

The 15.8% gap between the Intel and NVIDIA parts is substantial. It is larger than any of the deltas recorded between either GPU and its own nearest rivals. The Intel HD Graphics P530 is not just marginally ahead; it is clearly ahead in the only benchmark that both GPUs share.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel HD Graphics P530 wins in compute performance, as demonstrated by the Geekbench OpenCL score of 4549 versus 3930. It also wins in API support, offering Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_1) versus the Quadro's DirectX 12 (11_0) and no Vulkan. It wins decisively in power efficiency, with a 15 W TDP compared to 62 W for the Quadro. The Intel part is also more compact in physical presence: it is an IGP with no slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU requirement. The Intel part wins in FP16 capability, with 768.0 GFLOPS, while the Quadro has no FP16 support.

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D wins in memory structure. It has 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 41.60 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part relies on system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, which is a weaker configuration for any workload sensitive to memory latency or bandwidth. The Quadro also wins in fill-rate-oriented metrics: pixel rate of 5.000 GPixel/s versus 3.000 GPixel/s, texture rate of 20.00 GTexel/s versus 16.00 GTexel/s, 32 TMUs versus 16, and 16 ROPs versus 3. It has higher FP32 compute at 480.0 GFLOPS versus 384.0 GFLOPS, though the benchmark result does not reflect that advantage. The Quadro 2000D has a defined physical form factor as a single-slot, 178 mm long card with 2x DVI outputs, which may be preferable in systems that require a discrete card with dedicated display connectors.

For use cases that rely on the recorded OpenCL compute score, the Intel HD Graphics P530 is the winner. For use cases that demand dedicated video memory, higher fill rates, or specific workstation display outputs, the Quadro 2000D has structural advantages, but those advantages do not appear in the benchmark results. The data shows one clear winner in performance, and the Intel HD Graphics P530 is that winner.