Intel UHD Graphics 730 vs NVIDIA Quadro M4000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 and Intel UHD Graphics 730 occupy opposite ends of the graphics spectrum, yet benchmark data places them in a surprisingly close overall percentile ranking. The Quadro M4000, a professional workstation card from 2015, delivers overwhelming compute performance, while the Intel UHD Graphics 730, an integrated solution from 2021, offers efficiency and modern feature support. The head-to-head results show a clear winner in raw performance, but the context of each product’s intended role matters significantly.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data shows a decisive victory for the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 in both available cross-benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro M4000 scores 19,118 points compared to the Intel UHD Graphics 730’s 5,988 points. This translates to a 219.3% advantage for the NVIDIA card, meaning it delivers more than three times the compute throughput in this API. The margin is even larger in Geekbench Vulkan, where the Quadro M4000 posts 24,640 points against 5,870 points for the Intel integrated graphics — a 319.8% delta. In practical terms, the Quadro M4000 is roughly four times faster in Vulkan workloads, which typically favor modern driver overhead and asynchronous compute features.

These two benchmarks represent the entire shared test suite, and the Quadro M4000 wins both, giving it a 2-0 record in head-to-head comparisons. The magnitude of the wins is notable: a 219% lead in OpenCL and a 320% lead in Vulkan. For context, the Quadro M4000’s average benchmark score across all its tested workloads is 5,467, while the Intel UHD Graphics 730 averages 5,929 — a difference of only about 8% in favor of the Intel part. This apparent contradiction highlights how the two products are optimized for different tasks. The Quadro M4000’s PassMark G3D score of 6,680 and PassMark GPU Compute score of 2,660 show strong DirectX and compute performance, whereas the Intel part’s only other listed benchmarks (OpenCL and Vulkan) are its weakest relative results.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each product further illuminates the competitive landscape. The Quadro M4000 sits within 0.7% of the AMD Radeon R7 M440 (5,483), the AMD Radeon 610M (5,444), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M (5,501), and the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 (5,508). These deltas are all under 1%, indicating that the Quadro M4000 is statistically tied with these mobile and entry-level discrete GPUs in average score. The Intel UHD Graphics 730, meanwhile, is within 0.9% of the AMD Radeon HD 8730M (5,955), NVIDIA Quadro K620M (5,957), AMD Radeon HD 8750M (5,970), and NVIDIA Quadro K4000 (5,982). The Intel part edges out all four of these rivals by less than 1%, placing it in the same performance tier as decade-old midrange discrete mobile graphics.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the choice depends entirely on workload priorities. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 is the clear winner for anyone needing raw compute throughput, particularly in OpenCL and Vulkan scenarios where it leads by 219% and 320% respectively. Its 8 GB of GDDR5 memory with 192.3 GB/s bandwidth provides dedicated memory bandwidth that the Intel part cannot match, as the latter relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth described only as “System Dependent.” The Quadro M4000 also offers 2.573 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 499.2 GFLOPS for the Intel UHD Graphics 730 — a five-fold difference in raw floating-point capability.

However, the Intel UHD Graphics 730 is not without merit. Its average benchmark score of 5,929 slightly exceeds the Quadro M4000’s 5,467, and its percentile ranking (33rd vs 32nd) is marginally better. This suggests that in mixed or lighter workloads, the Intel part holds its own. The Intel chip also consumes just 15 W of TDP versus 120 W for the NVIDIA card, making it suitable for systems without discrete power connectors. The Quadro M4000 requires a single 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU, while the Intel part is an IGP with no additional power requirements.

For professional users running CUDA-accelerated or OpenCL-heavy applications, the Quadro M4000 is the only rational choice — its 1,664 shading units, 104 TMUs, and 64 ROPs dwarf the Intel part’s 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. For basic desktop tasks, media playback, or light productivity, the Intel UHD Graphics 730 offers sufficient performance with far lower power draw and no add-in card requirements. The data does not support using the Intel part for serious 3D rendering or compute tasks; it simply lacks the hardware resources.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 is built on the GM204 chip using the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This is a dedicated discrete GPU with 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.1 million per mm². The Intel UHD Graphics 730 uses the Rocket Lake chip with Intel’s Generation 12.1 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm+++ process at Intel. The Intel part has no listed transistor count or die size, reflecting its integration into a larger processor die rather than being a standalone chip.

The Maxwell 2.0 architecture in the Quadro M4000 is designed for professional workloads, with support for DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel Generation 12.1 architecture also supports these same API versions, which means both parts are feature-equal in terms of API compatibility. However, the underlying hardware implementations differ dramatically. The Quadro M4000 has no RT or tensor cores, and neither does the Intel part, so ray tracing and AI acceleration are absent from both.

The memory architecture is fundamentally different. The Quadro M4000 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, achieving 192.3 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel UHD Graphics 730 uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth figure. This means the Intel part’s performance scales with the host system’s memory configuration, whereas the Quadro M4000 has predictable, dedicated bandwidth. The Quadro M4000’s pixel rate is 49.47 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 80.39 GTexel/s, compared to 10.40 GPixel/s and 15.60 GTexel/s for the Intel part — roughly a 4.8x and 5.2x advantage respectively for NVIDIA.

Specification Differences

The most striking specification gap is in execution resources. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 has 1,664 shading units, 104 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. The Intel UHD Graphics 730 has 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This represents an 8.7x difference in shader count, an 8.7x difference in TMUs, and an 8x difference in ROPs. These ratios directly explain the massive performance deltas in compute-heavy benchmarks.

Clock speeds differ in nature as well. The Quadro M4000 lists a memory clock of 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) but has no base or boost clock listed. The Intel UHD Graphics 730 operates at a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1300 MHz. The memory configuration is entirely different: 8 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus for NVIDIA versus System Shared memory for Intel.

Power and physical requirements diverge completely. The Quadro M4000 has a 120 W TDP, is a single-slot card, requires a 1x 6-pin power connector, and needs a 300 W suggested PSU. It measures 241 mm in length and 111 mm in height. The Intel UHD Graphics 730 has a 15 W TDP, is an IGP with no power connectors, no suggested PSU, and no physical dimensions since it is integrated into the processor. The bus interface also differs: the Quadro M4000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Intel part uses Ring Bus.

The display outputs reflect their intended usage. The Quadro M4000 provides 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, suitable for multi-monitor professional setups. The Intel UHD Graphics 730’s display outputs are motherboard dependent, meaning they vary by the specific motherboard design. The Quadro M4000 was released on June 28, 2015, while the Intel UHD Graphics 730 launched on March 29, 2021 — a nearly six-year gap that explains the architectural differences.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 730 has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 5,929 compared to the NVIDIA Quadro M4000’s 5,467, a difference of about 8% in favor of Intel.

Q: How much faster is the Quadro M4000 in Vulkan performance?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the Quadro M4000 scores 24,640 versus 5,870 for the Intel UHD Graphics 730, representing a 319.8% advantage for the NVIDIA card.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The Quadro M4000 has a 120 W TDP and requires a single 6-pin power connector with a 300 W suggested PSU. The Intel UHD Graphics 730 has a 15 W TDP and requires no power connectors or additional PSU headroom.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics API versions?

A: Yes, both the Quadro M4000 and Intel UHD Graphics 730 support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each GPU?

A: The Quadro M4000 has 192.3 GB/s bandwidth from 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. The Intel UHD Graphics 730 uses system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent.

Q: Which GPU has better performance relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 730 outperforms all four of its nearest rivals (AMD Radeon HD 8730M, NVIDIA Quadro K620M, AMD Radeon HD 8750M, NVIDIA Quadro K4000) by 0.4% to 0.9%. The Quadro M4000 shows mixed results, beating the AMD Radeon 610M by 0.4% but trailing the AMD Radeon R7 M440, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M, and NVIDIA GeForce MX130 by 0.3% to 0.7%.