Intel UHD Graphics 710 vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000 and Intel UHD Graphics 710 occupy opposite ends of the GPU design spectrum: a discrete, Fermi-era workstation card from 2010 facing off against a modern integrated graphics processor embedded in Alder Lake silicon. While the data shows a clear overall winner, the comparison reveals how architectural priorities and intended use cases shape benchmark outcomes.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, and it decisively favors the Quadro 2000. The NVIDIA card scores 3898 points against the Intel UHD Graphics 710's 3496 points, producing an 11.5% delta in NVIDIA's favor. This is not a marginal victory; an 11.5% lead in a compute-oriented API test indicates that the Quadro 2000's dedicated memory subsystem and higher raw FP32 throughput translate into measurable performance advantages.

Contextualizing the Quadro 2000's score against its nearest rivals shows it sits in a tightly contested performance cluster. The Quadro 2000 trails the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D by 0.8% (3930 vs. 3898), the GeForce GT 745M by 1.4% (3953 vs. 3898), and the Quadro K2000D by 0.5% (3919 vs. 3898). Meanwhile, it edges out the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics by a razor-thin 0.4% (3883 vs. 3898). This positioning at the 23rd percentile of all GPUs suggests the Fermi card remains competitive with much newer low-end hardware in synthetic compute workloads.

The Intel UHD Graphics 710, scoring 3496 in OpenCL, sits at the 22nd percentile overall. Its nearest rivals show a different competitive landscape. The integrated Intel part trails the GeForce GTX 650 by 0.8% (3823 vs. 3496) and the GeForce MX110 by 1.1% (3834 vs. 3496). However, it actually beats the GeForce GT 635M by 1.4% (3740 vs. 3496) and the Quadro 3000M by 2% (3718 vs. 3496). The Intel chip's average benchmark score across OpenCL and Vulkan tests is 3792, but its Vulkan score of 4088 demonstrates that API choice significantly impacts its performance profile.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architectural divide is stark. The Quadro 2000 uses NVIDIA's Fermi architecture built on a 40 nm process at TSMC, packing 1,170 million transistors into a 238 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 4.9M per mm². In contrast, the Intel UHD Graphics 710 employs Intel's Generation 12.2 architecture (Alder Lake) fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel's own fabs. The data does not list transistor counts or die sizes for the Intel part, reflecting its nature as an integrated component rather than a standalone chip.

The compute resources differ substantially. The Quadro 2000 deploys 192 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 counters with 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This 1.5x advantage in shading units and 4x advantage in TMUs explains the Quadro's higher theoretical throughput. The pixel rate tells the story clearly: the Quadro 2000 achieves 5.000 GPixel/s while the Intel part reaches 10.40 GPixel/s. Surprisingly, the newer integrated GPU nearly doubles the fill rate despite having half the ROPs, a signal of clock speed advantages.

Clock behavior reveals another key difference. The Quadro 2000's memory runs at 650 MHz with 2.6 Gbps effective speed, while its core clocks are not listed in the data. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1300 MHz, providing a dynamic range that the Fermi card cannot match. The texture rate figures reflect this: the Quadro 2000 produces 20.00 GTexel/s, while the Intel part delivers 10.40 GTexel/s. The Fermi card's higher TMU count and dedicated memory give it a 1.92x texture throughput advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro 2000 wins in scenarios demanding raw compute throughput and dedicated memory bandwidth. Its OpenCL lead of 11.5% over the Intel part demonstrates superiority in general-purpose GPU compute tasks. The 192 shading units provide 480.0 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to the Intel's 332.8 GFLOPS — a 44% advantage. For workloads like CAD rendering, scientific simulation, or any OpenCL-accelerated professional application, the data suggests the Quadro 2000 is the stronger choice despite its age.

The Intel UHD Graphics 710 wins in efficiency and modern API support. Its 15 W TDP is dramatically lower than the Quadro 2000's 62 W, making it suitable for systems where power consumption is critical. The integrated nature means no additional slot width, power connectors, or dedicated cooling required — the Quadro 2000 needs a single-slot cooler and a 250 W suggested power supply. The Intel part also supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro 2000 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and has no listed Vulkan support. The Intel's Vulkan score of 4088 exceeds its OpenCL score of 3496 by 16.9%, suggesting modern APIs unlock additional performance.

The Intel part also wins on pixel throughput, delivering 10.40 GPixel/s versus the Quadro's 5.000 GPixel/s. This 2.08x advantage in pixel fill rate could benefit basic 2D desktop rendering or light graphics workloads. However, the Quadro 2000's texture rate of 20.00 GTexel/s versus 10.40 GTexel/s for the Intel part indicates the NVIDIA card handles texture-heavy workloads better.

Specification Differences

The specification gaps between these two GPUs are extensive. The Quadro 2000 uses a 1024 MB GDDR5 dedicated memory pool with a 128-bit bus width, delivering 41.60 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 relies on System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth — no dedicated memory allocation exists. This architectural difference explains why the Quadro 2000 maintains compute performance consistency while the Intel part's performance varies with system memory configuration.

Process technology divides them sharply: the Quadro 2000 uses 40 nm TSMC fabrication, while the Intel part uses 10 nm Intel fabrication. The NVIDIA chip's 238 mm² die and 1,170 million transistors dwarf the Intel's integrated implementation, but the newer 10 nm process allows higher clock speeds. The Intel part's boost clock of 1300 MHz far exceeds the Quadro's unlisted core clock, though the memory speed comparison is apples-to-oranges: 2.6 Gbps effective GDDR5 versus System Shared.

The bus interface differs fundamentally. The Quadro 2000 connects via PCIe 2.0 x16, a standard discrete GPU slot. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 uses a Ring Bus, reflecting its integration into the CPU die. Display outputs follow the same pattern: the Quadro 2000 provides 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort, while the Intel part's outputs are Motherboard Dependent. The Quadro 2000 measures 178 mm in length and 111 mm in height, while the Intel part has no physical dimensions listed — it exists within the processor package.

FP16 capability exists only on the Intel part, offering 665.6 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio to FP32. The Quadro 2000 lists no FP16 support. The Quadro 2000's launch MSRP is 599 USD, while the Intel part has no listed launch MSRP. The Quadro 2000 was released on 2010-12-23 and has a predecessor (Quadro FX Tesla) and successor (Quadro Kepler). The Intel UHD Graphics 710, released on 2022-01-03, has no listed predecessor or successor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 2000 scores 3898 in Geekbench OpenCL, beating the Intel UHD Graphics 710's 3496 by 11.5%.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Quadro 2000 has a 62 W TDP, while the Intel UHD Graphics 710 consumes only 15 W — a 47 W difference favoring the integrated part.

Q: Does the Intel UHD Graphics 710 support more modern APIs?

A: Yes. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro 2000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) with no Vulkan listing.

Q: How does memory configuration differ?

A: The Quadro 2000 uses 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus and 41.60 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 uses System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has higher shading unit count?

A: The Quadro 2000 has 192 shading units, compared to 128 on the Intel UHD Graphics 710, giving NVIDIA a 50% advantage in this metric.

Q: What are the pixel and texture rate comparisons?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 710 achieves 10.40 GPixel/s versus the Quadro's 5.000 GPixel/s, but the Quadro 2000 delivers 20.00 GTexel/s versus the Intel's 10.40 GTexel/s.