Intel UHD Graphics P630 vs NVIDIA GeForce 930A Comparison

Intel UHD Graphics P630 and NVIDIA GeForce 930A are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions, but the data shows a clear, if narrow, performance edge for the NVIDIA part. In the single available head-to-head benchmark, the GeForce 930A leads the Intel UHD Graphics P630 by 3.9% in Geekbench OpenCL, recording 5317 points versus 5111 points. Both GPUs sit in the 31st percentile of all GPUs, placing them in the same performance tier, though the NVIDIA chip’s slight advantage is consistent with its dedicated memory and higher raw compute figures.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is unambiguous. The NVIDIA GeForce 930A scores 5317, while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 trails with 5111. This delta of -3.9% for Intel is a modest but measurable loss. In practical terms, the 930A’s 206-point advantage indicates it handles general-purpose compute workloads, such as OpenCL-accelerated filters or physics simulations, with slightly more fluidity. Neither GPU is a powerhouse in this metric; the 930A’s score of 5317 places it nearly level with its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce 840M, which averages 5322 (a 0.1% deficit for the 930A). The Intel P630, meanwhile, is virtually tied with the AMD Radeon R7 M445, which averages 5358, a 0.2% gap in Intel’s favor.

The absence of a Vulkan benchmark for the 930A means the Intel P630’s 5628 Geekbench Vulkan score stands unchallenged in direct comparison. However, looking at the rival landscape, the P630’s Vulkan result is its strongest showing, outpacing its own OpenCL score by over 10%. This suggests Intel’s driver overhead or architecture scales better with Vulkan’s lower-level API. Yet, for the OpenCL test that both share, the verdict is clear: the GeForce 930A takes the win. The 3.9% margin is small enough that real-world differences would be imperceptible in most tasks, but benchmark results indicate the NVIDIA part is consistently faster in this compute scenario.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs diverge fundamentally in their design philosophy. The Intel UHD Graphics P630 is an integrated graphics processor built on Intel’s Generation 9.5 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm+++ process. It uses the Comet Lake GT2 chip and connects to the rest of the system via a Ring Bus. In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce 930A is a discrete-class part (though often soldered on mobile boards) based on the Maxwell architecture, using the GM108 chip manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. This node disadvantage for NVIDIA is offset by a larger transistor budget: the GM108 packs 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, yielding a density of 13.2M transistors per mm². The Intel part does not disclose transistor counts or die size in the data.

The most significant architectural split is memory. The Intel P630 uses System Shared memory, meaning its bandwidth and capacity are "System Dependent." This is a critical bottleneck for integrated graphics, as the GPU competes with the CPU for the same memory pool. The GeForce 930A, however, has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 16.02 GB/s of bandwidth. This dedicated allocation explains why the 930A can edge out the Intel part despite having fewer texture units (24 TMUs for both, but Intel has 3 ROPs versus 8 for NVIDIA). The NVIDIA chip also has twice the shading units: 384 versus 192. This doubling of shaders directly contributes to its higher FP32 throughput of 722.7 GFLOPS, compared to 460.8 GFLOPS for the Intel P630.

Clock speeds tell the rest of the story. The GeForce 930A runs at a 928 MHz base and 941 MHz boost, while the Intel P630 has a 350 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost. The Intel part’s higher boost clock helps it close the gap in texture fill rate (28.80 GTexel/s versus 22.58 GTexel/s for NVIDIA), but the NVIDIA part counters with a superior pixel rate of 7.528 GPixel/s versus 3.600 GPixel/s, thanks to its 8 ROPs. Power consumption also differs sharply: the Intel P630 is rated at 15 W TDP, while the GeForce 930A consumes 33 W. This is a direct consequence of NVIDIA’s dedicated memory and higher shader count.

API support is a mixed bag. The Intel P630 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, with Vulkan 1.3. The GeForce 930A also supports DirectX 12, but at the lower feature level of 11_0, and OpenGL 4.6, with a newer Vulkan 1.4. For raw API modernity, Intel leads in DirectX feature level, while NVIDIA leads in Vulkan version. Neither supports ray tracing or tensor cores, as both are legacy parts.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930A leads in FP32 performance with 722.7 GFLOPS, compared to 460.8 GFLOPS for the Intel UHD Graphics P630. This is driven by the NVIDIA part’s 384 shading units versus Intel’s 192.

Q: How does memory configuration impact performance?

A: The GeForce 930A has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory with 16.02 GB/s bandwidth on a 64-bit bus. The Intel P630 uses System Shared memory, where capacity and bandwidth are system-dependent. This dedicated allocation is a key reason the 930A wins the OpenCL benchmark despite similar fill rates.

Q: Which GPU supports newer DirectX features?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics P630 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), which includes feature level 12_1. The NVIDIA GeForce 930A supports DirectX 12 (11_0), a lower feature level. For Vulkan, the NVIDIA part supports version 1.4, while Intel supports 1.3.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics P630 has a TDP of 15 W, while the NVIDIA GeForce 930A is rated at 33 W. This makes the Intel part more suitable for power-constrained ultraportable designs, whereas the NVIDIA chip requires more cooling and battery draw.

Q: Are these GPUs still relevant for modern workloads?

A: Both are end-of-life products. The Intel P630 was released in May 2020, while the GeForce 930A dates to March 2015. Their 31st percentile ranking against all GPUs indicates they sit below the median performance level, suited mainly for legacy applications or light, non-demanding tasks.

Q: Which GPU has better pixel and texture throughput?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930A achieves 7.528 GPixel/s pixel rate versus 3.600 GPixel/s for the Intel P630. However, Intel wins texture rate with 28.80 GTexel/s versus 22.58 GTexel/s for NVIDIA.

The Verdict

The data points to a narrow but consistent victory for the NVIDIA GeForce 930A. It wins the sole head-to-head benchmark (Geekbench OpenCL) by 3.9%, offers double the shading units, and provides dedicated memory with a fixed bandwidth of 16.02 GB/s. Its FP32 throughput of 722.7 GFLOPS is 56.8% higher than the Intel P630’s 460.8 GFLOPS, a substantial theoretical edge. For any application that leverages OpenCL compute, the 930A is the better performer.

The Intel UHD Graphics P630 is not without merit. Its 15 W TDP is less than half of the 930A’s 33 W, making it a far more efficient choice for thin-and-light laptops where battery life is paramount. It also supports a higher DirectX feature level (12_1 versus 11_0), which could matter for specific legacy titles that require that feature set. Additionally, its texture fill rate is superior, and its Vulkan score of 5628 suggests it handles modern API workloads well, even if no direct comparison exists.

For a user prioritizing raw compute performance in a laptop with adequate cooling, the GeForce 930A is the clear choice. For a user who values power efficiency, lower heat output, and a more modern DirectX feature set, the Intel P630 is the better fit, provided they accept its reliance on shared system memory. Neither GPU is suitable for demanding gaming or professional workloads; their 31st percentile ranking confirms they are entry-level solutions.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel UHD Graphics P630 | NVIDIA GeForce 930A |

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

| Architecture | Generation 9.5 | Maxwell |

| Process Node | 14 nm+++ | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not disclosed | 1,020 million |

| Die Size | Not disclosed | 77 mm² |

| Base Clock | 350 MHz | 928 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1200 MHz | 941 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 16.02 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 192 | 384 |

| ROPs | 3 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 3.600 GPixel/s | 7.528 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 28.80 GTexel/s | 22.58 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 460.8 GFLOPS | 722.7 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 921.6 GFLOPS (2:1) | Not disclosed |

| TDP | 15 W | 33 W |

| Bus Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

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

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2020-05-12 | 2015-03-12 |

| Predecessor | Not disclosed | GeForce 800A |

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA GeForce 930A wins on: OpenCL compute performance (3.9% ahead in Geekbench), pixel fill rate (7.528 GPixel/s versus 3.600 GPixel/s), FP32 throughput (722.7 GFLOPS versus 460.8 GFLOPS), and memory consistency (dedicated 2 GB with fixed 16.02 GB/s bandwidth). It is the better choice for any workload that relies on general-purpose GPU compute, such as video encoding, code compilation, or OpenCL-accelerated filters in creative apps.

Intel UHD Graphics P630 wins on: power efficiency (15 W TDP versus 33 W), texture fill rate (28.80 GTexel/s versus 22.58 GTexel/s), and DirectX feature level (12_1 versus 11_0). It also has a higher Vulkan benchmark score (5628) than its own OpenCL score, though no direct rival result exists. For light productivity tasks, office work, and older games that prefer texture-heavy rendering, the Intel part is adequate, and its lower power draw makes it ideal for fanless or ultraportable designs.

In summary, the 930A is the stronger compute part, while the P630 is the more efficient and API-forward option. The 3.9% benchmark delta is the deciding factor for most users: if you need the extra performance, take the NVIDIA; if you need the battery life, take the Intel.