Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural generations of these two integrated GPUs?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile is based on Generation 12.2 architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process with a Raptor Lake chip. The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process with a GB20B chip.

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare?

A: The Intel part has 256 shading units, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM has 2048 shading units. This eightfold difference in shading units is a primary driver of the large performance gap in raw compute workloads.

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs support?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA N1 16SM has 128 GB of dedicated LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same API feature sets?

A: No. The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1 16SM lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A, indicating no comparable API support is recorded in the database.

Q: What is the clock speed range for each GPU?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile runs at a base clock of 300 MHz and boosts to 1600 MHz. The NVIDIA N1 16SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and boosts to 2346 MHz.

Q: What is the production status and release timeframe?

A: Both GPUs are listed as Active in production status. The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile was released on January 3, 2023, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM has a release date of May 31, 2026.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows a clear split in workload suitability between these two integrated GPUs. The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile is designed for lightweight, power-constrained environments where its 15 W TDP and system shared memory keep the entire platform simple and efficient. It wins in scenarios where the host device prioritizes battery life and minimal thermal footprint over graphical muscle. The recorded data shows no benchmark wins for either GPU individually, but the architectural specifications strongly indicate where each part excels.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM wins decisively in any compute-heavy or graphics-intensive task. Its 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 24 render output units dwarf the Intel part's 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The N1 also has 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, which the Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile lacks entirely. For workloads involving ray-traced lighting, AI inference, or machine learning acceleration, the NVIDIA part is the only viable option between the two.

The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile wins in compatibility and API support. It offers DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the NVIDIA N1 16SM lists N/A for all three APIs. For legacy applications or software that requires these specific API versions, the Intel GPU is the safer choice. The Intel part also wins on power efficiency at the system level, with its 15 W TDP versus the unknown power draw of the NVIDIA part, though the NVIDIA GPU's 5 nm process node suggests modern efficiency characteristics.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile uses Generation 12.2 architecture, which is Intel's integrated graphics solution built into Raptor Lake processors. It is manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process and connects to the rest of the system via a Ring Bus interface. This design keeps the GPU tightly coupled to the CPU and system memory, with no dedicated VRAM. The GPU has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units, with no ray tracing or tensor core hardware.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses Blackwell 2.0 architecture, built on TSMC's 5 nm process. It is a much larger and more complex design, with a die size of 382 mm². The GPU has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, plus 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores. Memory is handled through 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16, which provides a high-bandwidth connection to the host system.

The transistor counts and die sizes differ starkly. The Intel part has no listed transistor count or die size, reflecting its integrated nature where the GPU shares the chip with CPU cores. The NVIDIA part is a discrete-class IGP with a 382 mm² die, indicating a substantial amount of silicon dedicated to graphics and compute hardware. The process node difference, 10 nm versus 5 nm, gives the NVIDIA part a density advantage that helps accommodate its larger feature set.

Both GPUs are classified as IGP (integrated graphics processor) in slot width, meaning neither requires a dedicated expansion slot. The NVIDIA N1 16SM has no power connectors listed, while the Intel part also has none. The display outputs differ: the Intel GPU is portable device dependent, while the NVIDIA part has 1x HDMI.

Specification Differences

The specification tables show several fields where these two GPUs differ directly. The most significant difference is in shading units: 256 for Intel versus 2048 for NVIDIA. Texture mapping units are 16 versus 128, and render output units are 8 versus 24. The NVIDIA part has 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, while the Intel part has neither.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1600 MHz. The NVIDIA N1 16SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. The memory clocks also differ: the Intel GPU uses system shared memory, while the NVIDIA part runs at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective speed.

Memory capacity and bandwidth are completely different. The Intel GPU has system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. This dedicated memory arrangement gives the NVIDIA part predictable performance regardless of system memory load.

The process nodes differ: Intel uses 10 nm, while NVIDIA uses 5 nm from TSMC. The bus interface also differs: Intel uses Ring Bus, while NVIDIA uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs are portable device dependent for Intel, versus 1x HDMI for NVIDIA.

API support differs significantly. The Intel part lists DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1 16SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The power draw is listed as 15 W for Intel, while NVIDIA's TDP is unknown.

The pixel rates and texture rates reflect the raw throughput differences. Intel achieves 12.80 GPixel/s and 25.60 GTexel/s, while NVIDIA achieves 56.30 GPixel/s and 300.3 GTexel/s. Floating point performance shows 819.2 GFLOPS FP32 for Intel versus 9.609 TFLOPS FP32 for NVIDIA. The FP16 rates are 1.638 TFLOPS (2:1) for Intel and 9.609 TFLOPS (1:1) for NVIDIA. The NVIDIA part's FP16 runs at the same rate as FP32, indicating full-rate half-precision compute.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark scores for these two GPUs, and neither part has individual benchmark entries or average benchmark scores. The wins counters show zero for both GPUs. However, the specification data allows for direct numerical comparisons across several performance metrics.

The most dramatic difference is in FP32 compute. The NVIDIA N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS, which is approximately 11.7 times the 819.2 GFLOPS of the Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile. This means the NVIDIA part can process massively more floating-point operations per second, making it far better suited for general compute, physics simulation, and modern game rendering.

Texture fill rate shows an even larger gap. The NVIDIA part achieves 300.3 GTexel/s versus 25.60 GTexel/s for Intel, a factor of roughly 11.7. This directly impacts how many texture-mapped pixels can be rendered per second, which is critical for detailed surfaces and materials in 3D scenes. The pixel fill rate is 56.30 GPixel/s for NVIDIA versus 12.80 GPixel/s for Intel, a factor of about 4.4. This smaller gap in pixel rate relative to texture rate suggests the NVIDIA part is more heavily weighted toward texture-heavy workloads.

The shading unit ratio is exactly 8:1 in favor of NVIDIA, and the TMU ratio is also 8:1. The ROP ratio is 3:1. These ratios align closely with the FP32 and texture rate deltas, indicating that the NVIDIA part scales its compute resources proportionally across the graphics pipeline.

Clock speeds show NVIDIA's boost clock of 2346 MHz versus Intel's 1600 MHz, a 46.6% advantage. Combined with the 8x shading unit count, this explains the massive throughput difference. The NVIDIA part also has a higher base clock at 741 MHz versus 300 MHz.

Memory bandwidth is the most lopsided specification. The NVIDIA part has 273.2 GB/s of dedicated LPDDR5X bandwidth, while the Intel part's bandwidth is system dependent with no fixed figure. Dedicated memory also avoids contention with CPU memory traffic, which can throttle integrated GPUs that share system memory.

The NVIDIA part has 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, providing hardware acceleration for ray-traced graphics and AI workloads. The Intel part has none of these features, so any ray tracing or tensor-based task would run on general-purpose shaders, at significantly reduced performance.

Power consumption is the one spec where Intel leads. The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile is rated at 15 W TDP, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM's TDP is unknown. Given the NVIDIA part's higher clock speeds, larger die size, and dedicated memory, its power draw is likely higher, but the database does not list a figure.

The Verdict

The data points to two entirely different use cases. The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile is a low-power integrated solution for portable devices, with a 15 W TDP, system shared memory, and a 10 nm process. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it compatible with a wide range of software. Its performance ceiling is modest: 819.2 GFLOPS FP32, 12.80 GPixel/s, and 25.60 GTexel/s. For basic desktop composition, video playback, and light 2D workloads, this GPU has enough horsepower.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM is a far more capable integrated GPU. It delivers 9.609 TFLOPS FP32, 56.30 GPixel/s, and 300.3 GTexel/s, with 128 GB of dedicated LPDDR5X memory at 273.2 GB/s. It includes 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI inference. The 5 nm TSMC process and PCIe 5.0 x16 interface position it as a high-performance IGP for demanding applications. The trade-off is that its API support is listed as N/A, meaning software compatibility may be limited to proprietary or vendor-specific interfaces.

Users who need broad API compatibility and minimal power draw should choose the Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile. Users who need maximum compute throughput, dedicated memory bandwidth, ray tracing, and tensor acceleration should choose the NVIDIA N1 16SM. The performance gap in every measurable metric, except power and API support, favors the NVIDIA part by wide margins. The NVIDIA GPU's 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 24 ROPs provide a hardware foundation that the Intel GPU cannot match. The recorded specifications confirm that the NVIDIA N1 16SM is the stronger graphics processor, while the Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile serves the low-power, compatibility-first segment.