Intel UHD Graphics 730 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive victory for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M across all shared benchmark tests. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 980M scores 23,832 points, while the Intel UHD Graphics 730 scores 5,988 points. This represents a 74.9% advantage for the NVIDIA part, a margin that separates these two products by an entire performance class. The Intel integrated solution cannot compete with the dedicated mobile GPU in compute workloads, as the raw shading throughput difference is simply too large.

The Vulkan results tell a similar story, though with a slightly narrower gap. The GTX 980M posts 17,703 points against 5,870 points for the UHD Graphics 730, a 66.8% lead for the NVIDIA product. This suggests that while both GPUs support the same API level (Vulkan 1.4), the underlying hardware capabilities of the Maxwell 2.0 architecture deliver substantially higher frame throughput in modern graphics workloads. The Intel part's 192 shading units versus the GTX 980M's 1,536 shading units explains why the delta remains so consistent across different API frameworks.

The average benchmark scores further contextualize this comparison: the UHD Graphics 730 averages 5,929 points across its recorded benchmarks, while the GTX 980M averages 5,308 points across a much larger test suite. This apparent contradiction, where the GTX 980M has a lower average but wins every head-to-head test, reflects the fact that the NVIDIA part was subjected to a broader range of DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests in the Passmark suite, many of which score on different scales. The UHD Graphics 730 only has two recorded benchmark entries, both of which are Geekbench tests that score in the thousands.

Examining the GTX 980M's Passmark results reveals its performance profile across older DirectX versions: it scores 125 in DirectX 9, 35 in DirectX 10, 57 in DirectX 11, and 31 in DirectX 12. These numbers, while lower in absolute terms, demonstrate that the GPU remains functional across legacy APIs. The UHD Graphics 730 has no recorded Passmark scores, so direct comparison across those specific tests is not possible from the database. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test shows the GTX 980M scoring 649 points, a modest result that reflects the demanding nature of that particular workload.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 980M wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark, but the nature of its victories varies by workload type. In compute-heavy tasks, as measured by Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA part achieves a 74.9% advantage, indicating that its 3.462 TFLOPS of FP32 performance provides overwhelming compute throughput. This makes it the clear choice for GPU-accelerated applications such as video encoding, scientific simulations, or machine learning inference, all of which rely on raw floating-point capability.

In graphics-oriented Vulkan workloads, the GTX 980M still wins decisively at 66.8% ahead, but the margin narrows slightly. This suggests that the UHD Graphics 730's architecture, while far less powerful in absolute terms, handles modern graphics API overhead with reasonable efficiency relative to its compute capability. The Intel part's 12 texture mapping units and 8 render output units are minimal, yet the Vulkan score of 5,870 indicates that it can drive basic modern games at low resolutions and settings.

The UHD Graphics 730's only meaningful advantage is its power profile. With a TDP of 15 W, it consumes dramatically less power than the GTX 980M, which has no TDP listed in the database but belongs to a class of dedicated mobile GPUs that typically require substantial cooling solutions. For systems where battery life and thermal output are paramount, the Intel integrated solution is the only viable option. The GTX 980M, as an MXM module, requires a dedicated socket and proper thermal management, whereas the UHD Graphics 730 is an IGP that shares system memory and requires no additional power connectors.

The GTX 980M also wins on memory bandwidth, featuring 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus delivering 160.4 GB/s. The UHD Graphics 730 relies on system shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent," meaning its performance scales with the host system's RAM speed. In practice, this creates a situation where the Intel part's memory performance is variable and platform-dependent, while the NVIDIA part has deterministic, dedicated bandwidth.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M than the Intel UHD Graphics 730 in OpenCL compute?

A: The GTX 980M scores 23,832 points versus 5,988 points for the UHD Graphics 730, a 74.9% advantage for the NVIDIA part.

Q: Does the Intel UHD Graphics 730 beat the GTX 980M in any benchmark?

A: No. The database records zero wins for the Intel part and two wins for the GTX 980M across the shared Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The UHD Graphics 730 averages 5,929 points, while the GTX 980M averages 5,308 points, though the NVIDIA part was tested across a broader range of DirectX and Passmark workloads.

Q: Which GPU has better Vulkan API support?

A: Both support Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1), but the GTX 980M scores 17,703 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 66.8% higher than the UHD Graphics 730's 5,870.

Q: How does the GTX 980M perform in legacy DirectX 9 games?

A: The GTX 980M scores 125 in Passmark DirectX 9 testing, which is its highest legacy API score, followed by 57 in DirectX 11 and 35 in DirectX 10.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The GTX 980M has 8 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth. The UHD Graphics 730 uses system shared memory with no fixed size, type, or bandwidth, described as "System Dependent."

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ fundamentally in every measurable specification. The GTX 980M uses a 28 nm process node from TSMC, while the UHD Graphics 730 uses Intel's 14 nm+++ process. The NVIDIA chip, designated GM204, contains 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die with a transistor density of 13.1 million per mm². The Intel part, based on Rocket Lake with Generation 12.1 architecture, has no transistor count or die size listed in the database.

Clock speeds show the GTX 980M running at 1038 MHz base and 1127 MHz boost, while the UHD Graphics 730 runs at 300 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost. The Intel part actually boosts higher, but its dramatically lower core count negates this advantage. Memory clocks differ as well: the GTX 980M operates at 1253 MHz with 5 Gbps effective speed, while the Intel part uses system shared memory with no fixed clock.

The GTX 980M features 1,536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The UHD Graphics 730 has 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This 8:1 ratio in shading units and TMUs, plus an 8:1 ratio in ROPs, directly explains the performance gap. Pixel rate for the GTX 980M is 72.13 GPixel/s versus 10.40 GPixel/s for the Intel part. Texture rate shows 108.2 GTexel/s versus 15.60 GTexel/s.

The GTX 980M's FP32 performance is 3.462 TFLOPS, while the UHD Graphics 730 delivers 499.2 GFLOPS. The Intel part supports FP16 at 998.4 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the NVIDIA part has no FP16 data recorded. The GTX 980M uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface and is an MXM Module form factor, while the UHD Graphics 730 uses a Ring Bus interface and is an IGP with motherboard-dependent display outputs.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is stark. The UHD Graphics 730 belongs to Intel's Generation 12.1 architecture, built on the Rocket Lake chip. It is part of the HD Graphics (Rocket Lake) generation and was released on March 29, 2021. The GTX 980M uses NVIDIA's Maxwell 2.0 architecture on the GM204 chip, belonging to the GeForce 900M generation, released on October 6, 2014. Nearly seven years separate these products, yet the older NVIDIA design dominates performance.

The GTX 980M has a known die size of 398 mm² and transistor count of 5,200 million, manufactured by TSMC. The Intel part has no such details recorded, reflecting its nature as an integrated solution where the GPU shares the CPU die. The UHD Graphics 730 is built by Intel on its own 14 nm+++ process, while the GTX 980M relies on TSMC's 28 nm process. This process disadvantage for the older NVIDIA chip is overcome by sheer silicon area and dedicated design.

Memory architecture differs completely. The GTX 980M has dedicated 8 GB GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus and fixed 160.4 GB/s bandwidth. The UHD Graphics 730 has no dedicated memory; it uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. This makes the Intel part's memory performance a function of the host platform's RAM configuration, whereas the NVIDIA part has predictable, dedicated bandwidth.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, placing them at parity for modern API support. However, the GTX 980M has no FP16 performance recorded, while the Intel part lists FP16 at 998.4 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. Neither GPU includes ray tracing cores or tensor cores, as both predate those technologies. The GTX 980M's predecessor is the GeForce 800M and its successor is GeForce 10 Mobile, while the UHD Graphics 730 has no recorded predecessor or successor in the database.

The Verdict

The data leaves no ambiguity: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M is the superior performer in every recorded benchmark. With a 74.9% lead in OpenCL and a 66.8% lead in Vulkan, it outperforms the Intel UHD Graphics 730 by margins that indicate a completely different performance class. Users who need compute acceleration, modern gaming, or any GPU-intensive workload should choose the GTX 980M without reservation.

The UHD Graphics 730 is suitable only for systems where power consumption is the primary constraint. Its 15 W TDP, IGP form factor, and system shared memory make it appropriate for lightweight productivity tasks, basic display output, and workloads that do not require significant GPU compute. It has a higher boost clock than the GTX 980M at 1300 MHz versus 1127 MHz, but its 192 shading units simply cannot match the NVIDIA part's 1,536 shading units.

The GTX 980M's 8 GB GDDR5 memory with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth provides a massive advantage over the Intel part's system shared memory. For any application that requires texture storage, frame buffering, or large dataset processing, this dedicated memory configuration is essential. The Intel part's memory bandwidth being system dependent means its performance varies unpredictably across different platforms.

The percentile rankings reinforce this conclusion: the UHD Graphics 730 sits at the 33rd percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 980M sits at the 31st percentile. Despite the GTX 980M's lower percentile, this is an artifact of its broader benchmark suite including demanding DirectX 12 and 3DMark tests. The head-to-head data, which represents a direct comparison on identical workloads, is the definitive evidence.

For gaming laptops or mobile workstations requiring dedicated graphics performance, the GTX 980M is the only choice between these two. For ultra-portable systems with strict thermal limits and basic display needs, the UHD Graphics 730 suffices. The database records two wins for the NVIDIA part and zero for the Intel part, and the performance deltas are substantial enough that no use case reverses this verdict.