Intel UHD Graphics 730 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data shows a single decisive result: NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M wins the only head-to-head comparison available, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a score of 6493 against Intel UHD Graphics 730's 5988. That is an 8.4% advantage for the older NVIDIA part. In the database's broader percentile ranking, the GT 555M sits at the 37th percentile of all GPUs, while the UHD Graphics 730 sits at the 33rd percentile.

The Intel part does have one additional recorded benchmark, a Geekbench Vulkan score of 5870, which the NVIDIA part does not have a corresponding entry for. However, the database's aggregate average benchmark score for the GT 555M is 6493, derived from its single OpenCL result, whereas the UHD Graphics 730's average is 5929, pulled down by its Vulkan result. The Vulkan score is lower than its OpenCL score, which suggests the Intel iGPU is slightly more capable under OpenCL than under Vulkan in this specific test. But that does not change the overall picture: the NVIDIA part holds the higher peak performance in the shared test, and the Intel part trails in every comparable metric.

For use-case separation, the data indicates that the GT 555M is the stronger choice for OpenCL compute workloads, which often map to general-purpose GPU tasks such as video encoding, image processing, and physics simulations. The Intel UHD Graphics 730, despite its newer architecture, does not overtake the GT 555M in the recorded compute benchmark. The Intel part's Vulkan result, while present, is its weakest recorded score, meaning that if a workload relies on Vulkan compute, the Intel part performs even further behind its own OpenCL capability. There is no recorded win for the Intel part in any benchmark, so the use-case split is straightforward: the NVIDIA GPU wins the only comparative test, and the Intel GPU offers a second API path that measures lower.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design eras and market positions. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M uses the GF106 chip, built on Fermi architecture, manufactured by TSMC at a 40 nm process node. The chip contains 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 4.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel UHD Graphics 730 uses a Rocket Lake chip with Intel's Generation 12.1 architecture, built on Intel's 14 nm+++ process node. The database lists no transistor count or die size for the Intel part, so the comparison there is qualitative: Intel's process is newer but the architecture is an integrated design.

The memory subsystem differs sharply. The GT 555M has 1024 MB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth. The UHD Graphics 730 uses system shared memory for both capacity and type, with the bus width also listed as system shared, and bandwidth is system dependent. That means the Intel part's memory performance is entirely reliant on the host system's RAM configuration, while the NVIDIA part has a fixed, dedicated memory pool. In practical terms, the GT 555M's bandwidth is a fixed number, whereas the Intel part's bandwidth cannot be quantified from the database.

The compute units are configured differently. The GT 555M has 144 shading units, 24 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). The UHD Graphics 730 has 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. So the Intel part has more shading units but half the TMUs and half the ROPs. The pixel rate for the Intel part is 10.40 GPixel/s versus 3.540 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA part, a substantial difference in rasterization throughput. The texture rate is closer: 15.60 GTexel/s for Intel versus 14.16 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. The FP32 compute is 499.2 GFLOPS for Intel versus 339.8 GFLOPS for NVIDIA, a 47% advantage for Intel in raw floating-point throughput. The Intel part also lists FP16 performance at 998.4 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the NVIDIA part has no FP16 entry.

Clock behavior also diverges. The GT 555M has no base or boost clock listed, only a memory clock of 900 MHz with 1800 Mbps effective. The UHD Graphics 730 lists a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1300 MHz. The Intel part's boost clock is the only dynamic clocking data in the database for either part. The NVIDIA part's power draw is 35 W, while the Intel part is rated at 15 W, and the Intel part is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a slot width of "IGP," whereas the NVIDIA part is a discrete mobile GPU with a PCIe 2.0 x16 bus interface. The Intel part uses a Ring Bus interface.

The API support differs: the GT 555M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and no listed Vulkan support. The UHD Graphics 730 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel part has the higher DirectX feature level and Vulkan support, while the NVIDIA part lacks Vulkan entirely. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the NVIDIA part and motherboard dependent for the Intel part, reflecting their different deployment contexts.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for compute performance: the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M delivers an 8.4% higher OpenCL score than the Intel UHD Graphics 730. The GT 555M also ranks higher in the overall percentile distribution, at 37 versus 33. For anyone choosing between these two purely on recorded benchmark performance, the NVIDIA part wins the only head-to-head test.

However, the Intel part offers architectural advantages that the benchmark does not capture. The UHD Graphics 730 has nearly 47% higher FP32 compute (499.2 GFLOPS versus 339.8 GFLOPS), nearly triple the pixel rate (10.40 GPixel/s versus 3.540 GPixel/s), and a higher texture rate (15.60 GTexel/s versus 14.16 GTexel/s). It also supports a newer DirectX feature level (12_1 versus 11_0) and Vulkan 1.4, which the NVIDIA part lacks entirely. The Intel part uses system shared memory, so its actual bandwidth is system dependent, but it also runs at a much lower 15 W TDP versus 35 W for the NVIDIA part.

The verdict from the database is nuanced. The GT 555M wins the only directly comparable benchmark, making it the safer pick for OpenCL-based workloads where the score reflects real performance. The Intel part wins on raw architectural throughput metrics, but those metrics do not translate into a higher benchmark score in the recorded test. The Intel part's Vulkan support and DirectX 12_1 feature level make it more modern in API compatibility, but its actual Vulkan score of 5870 is its lowest recorded result. The GT 555M is end-of-life with a release date of July 2011; the Intel part is also end-of-life with a release date of March 2021. Neither part is current, but the Intel part is a decade newer in release timing.

For a user prioritizing raw compute in the recorded OpenCL test, the GT 555M is the choice. For a user prioritizing API coverage, lower power draw, and higher theoretical throughput metrics, the UHD Graphics 730 has the advantage. The database does not record any benchmark where the Intel part wins, so the verdict falls to the NVIDIA part in the only comparative measurement.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M scores 6493, while the Intel UHD Graphics 730 scores 5988. The NVIDIA part leads by 8.4%.

Q: Does the Intel UHD Graphics 730 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the Intel part lists Vulkan 1.4 support. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M has no Vulkan entry in the database.

Q: What is the DirectX feature level difference?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the Intel UHD Graphics 730 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The Intel part has the higher feature level.

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 730 has 192 shading units, whereas the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M has 144 shading units. The Intel part has 33% more shading units.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M has 1024 MB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel UHD Graphics 730 uses system shared memory for size, type, and bus width, with bandwidth listed as system dependent.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 730 has a pixel rate of 10.40 GPixel/s, which is nearly three times the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M's 3.540 GPixel/s.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M scores 6493, and the Intel UHD Graphics 730 scores 5988. That is an 8.4% delta in favor of the NVIDIA part. This is the sole comparative data point, so it carries the full weight of the head-to-head analysis.

The NVIDIA part's score places it just above the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M (6481, 0.2% higher) and just below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M (6513, 0.3% lower). The Intel part's score of 5988 places it near the AMD Radeon HD 8730M (5955, 0.4% lower) and the NVIDIA Quadro K620M (5957, 0.5% lower). The Intel UHD Graphics 730's average benchmark score is 5929, which is 8.7% below the NVIDIA part's average of 6493.

Looking at the Intel part's two recorded scores, the OpenCL result of 5988 is higher than its Vulkan result of 5870, a difference of about 2.0%. The NVIDIA part has no Vulkan score, so the Intel part's Vulkan result cannot be compared directly. The Intel part's OpenCL score is its stronger result, yet it still falls short of the NVIDIA part's OpenCL score by 505 points.

The biggest win for the NVIDIA part is the OpenCL benchmark itself, where it beats the Intel part by 8.4%. The Intel part's theoretical advantages in FP32 compute, pixel rate, and texture rate do not appear in this benchmark. The Intel part's FP32 throughput is 47% higher than the NVIDIA part, and its pixel rate is nearly 200% higher, yet the OpenCL score is lower. This suggests the benchmark is sensitive to factors other than raw shader throughput, possibly memory bandwidth, driver optimization, or the specific workload characteristics of OpenCL.

The Intel part's only measurable win is its Vulkan score of 5870, which exists as a data point but has no NVIDIA counterpart. Since the database records no head-to-head Vulkan test, the Intel part cannot claim a comparative victory. The wins column shows 1 win for the NVIDIA part and 0 for the Intel part.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across every major specification category except OpenGL version, which is 4.6 for both, and production status, which is end-of-life for both.

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M | Intel UHD Graphics 730 |

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

| Manufacturer | NVIDIA | Intel |

| Chip | GF106 | Rocket Lake |

| Architecture | Fermi | Generation 12.1 |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 14 nm+++ |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 1,170 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 238 mm² | Not listed |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 1300 MHz |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | System Shared |

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

| Shading Units | 144 | 192 |

| TMUs | 24 | 12 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 3.540 GPixel/s | 10.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 14.16 GTexel/s | 15.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 339.8 GFLOPS | 499.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 998.4 GFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 35 W | 15 W |

| Slot Width | Not listed | IGP |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | Ring Bus |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | Motherboard Dependent |

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

| Vulkan | Not listed | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2011-07-01 | 2021-03-29 |

The NVIDIA part has dedicated memory, more TMUs and ROPs, and a higher TDP. The Intel part has more shading units, higher clocks, a higher pixel rate, higher FP32, FP16 support, Vulkan support, a newer DirectX feature level, and a lower TDP. The process node difference is stark: 40 nm versus 14 nm+++, with the Intel part using a much newer fabrication process. The transistor count and die size for the Intel part are not recorded, so the density comparison is incomplete. The NVIDIA part's transistor density is 4.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel part's release date is nearly a decade later, yet both are end-of-life.