Intel HD Graphics P530 vs NVIDIA Quadro 4000M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits cleanly between these two mobile graphics parts, with the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M taking the only direct head-to-head comparison. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Quadro 4000M scores 5211, while the Intel HD Graphics P530 scores 4549. That gives the NVIDIA part a 14.6% advantage in compute workloads measured by OpenCL. The Quadro 4000M wins the sole head-to-head benchmark in the database, and it also holds a higher overall average benchmark score of 5211 versus the Intel part's 4560.

However, the Intel HD Graphics P530 has one measurable advantage that the Quadro 4000M lacks entirely: a Vulkan benchmark result. The Intel part records a Geekbench Vulkan score of 4571, while the NVIDIA database entry has no Vulkan score listed at all. That means in any Vulkan-based workload, the Intel part has a recorded data point and the NVIDIA part has none, making the Intel iGPU the only one of the two with proven Vulkan performance in this database. The Quadro 4000M, by contrast, shows no Vulkan support in its API list, while the Intel part lists Vulkan 1.3 support.

The wins also differ by category. The Quadro 4000M wins on raw compute throughput, pixel rate, texture rate, and memory bandwidth. The Intel part wins on power efficiency, process node, API feature level, and having a boost clock specification. The Quadro 4000M produces 638.4 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel HD Graphics P530 produces 384.0 GFLOPS. The NVIDIA part also has a pixel rate of 6.650 GPixel/s versus 3.000 GPixel/s for Intel, and a texture rate of 26.60 GTexel/s versus 16.00 GTexel/s. In memory bandwidth, the Quadro 4000M delivers 80.00 GB/s, while the Intel part's bandwidth is system dependent, meaning it shares main memory and has no fixed figure.

The Intel part does have one compute capability the NVIDIA part cannot match: FP16 performance. The HD Graphics P530 lists 768.0 GFLOPS of FP16 with a 2:1 ratio to FP32, while the Quadro 4000M has no FP16 figure recorded. For workloads that can use half-precision math, the Intel part has a distinct capability, though its FP32 throughput remains lower than the NVIDIA part's.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split in intended use cases. The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M is the stronger compute performer in OpenCL, with a 14.6% lead over the Intel HD Graphics P530 in the only head-to-head benchmark. Its 30th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it slightly above the Intel part's 26th percentile. The Quadro 4000M also sits in a tighter rival cluster: its nearest competitors include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M at 5236 (0.5% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce 940M at 5284 (1.4% higher), the AMD Radeon R7 M260X at 5161 (1% lower), and the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M at 5154 (1.1% lower). This places the Quadro 4000M within a narrow performance band around 5200 in OpenCL.

The Intel HD Graphics P530, by contrast, sits in a different competitive neighborhood. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 560 at 4569 (0.2% higher), the AMD Radeon R5 M230 at 4577 (0.4% higher), the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M at 4621 (1.3% higher), and the AMD FirePro W4190M at 4505 (1.2% lower). The Intel part's average score of 4560 places it roughly 13% below the Quadro 4000M's average of 5211.

For a user choosing strictly from the recorded data, the Quadro 4000M is the pick for OpenCL compute workloads, where its 14.6% lead translates into measurably better performance. The Intel HD Graphics P530 is the pick for Vulkan-based applications, as it has a recorded Vulkan score while the NVIDIA part has none. The Intel part also consumes 15 W of power against the Quadro's 100 W, making it the only sensible choice for power-constrained systems. The Quadro 4000M requires a dedicated MXM module with its own power delivery, while the Intel part is an integrated graphics processor on the ring bus, drawing from the same power envelope as the CPU.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records exactly one head-to-head benchmark between these two parts: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M scores 5211, and the Intel HD Graphics P530 scores 4549. The NVIDIA part wins by 662 points, which works out to a 14.6% delta. This is the only direct comparison available, so all conclusions about relative performance rest on this single result.

Breaking down the contributing factors, the Quadro 4000M's advantage comes from several hardware specifications. It has 336 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, against the Intel part's 192 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 3 ROPs. The NVIDIA part also has a 256-bit memory bus with dedicated GDDR5 memory totaling 2 GB, delivering 80.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part shares system memory with the CPU, has no dedicated memory bus width, and its bandwidth is listed as system dependent. These structural differences explain the 14.6% OpenCL gap.

The Intel part's lone counterpoint is its Vulkan result. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 4571 is higher than its own OpenCL score of 4549, though still below the NVIDIA part's OpenCL score of 5211. Since the Quadro 4000M has no Vulkan score in the database, there is no direct comparison possible in that API. The Intel part also lists a boost clock of 1000 MHz against a base clock of 350 MHz, while the Quadro 4000M has no base or boost clock recorded, only a memory clock of 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective). The Intel part's boost clock gives it a dynamic range that the NVIDIA part's entry does not document.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only head-to-head benchmark in the database?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5211 against the Intel HD Graphics P530's 4549, a 14.6% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel HD Graphics P530 have any benchmark where it outperforms the Quadro 4000M?

A: The Intel part has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 4571, while the Quadro 4000M has no Vulkan benchmark recorded. That gives the Intel part a data point in Vulkan that the NVIDIA part simply lacks.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in shading units and texture units?

A: The Quadro 4000M has 336 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Intel HD Graphics P530 has 192 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 3 ROPs.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The Quadro 4000M uses 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 80.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part uses system shared memory with no fixed bus width and system-dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The Quadro 4000M delivers 638.4 GFLOPS of FP32, while the Intel HD Graphics P530 delivers 384.0 GFLOPS.

Q: What power draw do the two parts list?

A: The Quadro 4000M is rated at 100 W, while the Intel HD Graphics P530 is rated at 15 W.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from completely different architectural lineages. The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M is built on the GF104 chip using the Fermi architecture, fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 1,950 million transistors on a die size of 332 mm², giving a transistor density of 5.9 million per square millimeter. The Intel HD Graphics P530 uses the Skylake GT2 chip with the Generation 9.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm+ process at Intel. Its die size is 123 mm², and no transistor count or density is recorded in the database.

The NVIDIA part belongs to the Quadro Fermi-M generation (x000M series) and was released on February 21, 2011. It is marked as end-of-life, with its predecessor being the Quadro FX Mobile and its successor the Quadro Kepler-M. The Intel part belongs to the HD Graphics-W (Skylake) generation and was released on August 31, 2015. It is also end-of-life, but no predecessor or successor is listed.

The memory architecture differs fundamentally. The Quadro 4000M has dedicated GDDR5 memory with a 256-bit bus and a fixed bandwidth of 80.00 GB/s. The Intel part has no dedicated memory; its memory size, type, and bus width are all listed as system shared, and bandwidth is system dependent. This means the Intel GPU relies entirely on the host system's memory subsystem, while the NVIDIA part has its own dedicated pool.

The compute resources also differ substantially. The Quadro 4000M has 336 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Intel HD Graphics P530 has 192 shading units, 16 TMUs, and only 3 ROPs. The NVIDIA part's pixel rate is 6.650 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 26.60 GTexel/s. The Intel part's pixel rate is 3.000 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 16.00 GTexel/s. The Quadro 4000M's FP32 throughput is 638.4 GFLOPS, while the Intel part's FP32 is 384.0 GFLOPS, though the Intel part adds 768.0 GFLOPS of FP16 with a 2:1 ratio.

The Intel part has a base clock of 350 MHz and a boost clock of 1000 MHz, while the Quadro 4000M has no base or boost clock recorded, only a memory clock of 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective). The Intel part also supports Vulkan 1.3, while the NVIDIA part lists no Vulkan support. Both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6, but the NVIDIA part's DirectX 12 is limited to the 11_0 feature level, while the Intel part supports the 12_1 feature level.

Specification Differences

The recorded specification differences between the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M and Intel HD Graphics P530 are substantial. The Quadro 4000M uses a GF104 chip with the Fermi architecture, while the Intel part uses a Skylake GT2 chip with Generation 9.0. The NVIDIA part is built on a 40 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel part uses a 14 nm+ process at Intel. The NVIDIA die is 332 mm², while the Intel die is 123 mm².

The NVIDIA part has 1,950 million transistors, while the Intel part has no transistor count recorded. The Quadro 4000M has 336 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, against the Intel part's 192 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 3 ROPs. The NVIDIA part's memory is 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 80.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel part uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

The clock specifications differ in kind: the Quadro 4000M has no base or boost clock, only a memory clock of 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective), while the Intel part has a base clock of 350 MHz and a boost clock of 1000 MHz. The NVIDIA part's pixel rate is 6.650 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 26.60 GTexel/s. The Intel part's pixel rate is 3.000 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 16.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 638.4 GFLOPS for NVIDIA and 384.0 GFLOPS for Intel; the Intel part additionally lists 768.0 GFLOPS of FP16, which the NVIDIA part does not.

Power draw differs by a wide margin: 100 W for the Quadro 4000M versus 15 W for the Intel HD Graphics P530. The NVIDIA part is an MXM module with no power connectors, while the Intel part is an IGP on the ring bus. The NVIDIA part's bus interface is MXM-B (3.0), while the Intel part uses the ring bus. Display outputs are portable device dependent for NVIDIA and motherboard dependent for Intel. The NVIDIA part supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan listed. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA part was released February 21, 2011; the Intel part was released August 31, 2015.