GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 and Intel UHD Graphics P630 occupy opposite ends of the graphics spectrum, and the benchmark data reflects a decisive performance gulf. The Quadro M4000 is a discrete workstation card built on a 28 nm process with a 5,200 million transistor GM204 chip, while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 is an integrated processor graphics solution on a 14 nm+++ node. In the two shared benchmark tests, the NVIDIA part wins both, with margins that are nothing short of overwhelming.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison consists of two compute-oriented tests: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In the OpenCL test, the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 scores 19,118 points against the Intel UHD Graphics P630’s 5,111 points. This translates to a delta of 274.1%, the Quadro M4000 is nearly four times faster in raw OpenCL compute throughput. The gap is even more pronounced in the Vulkan test, where the Quadro M4000 scores 24,640 points versus the Intel part’s 5,628 points, a delta of 337.8%. In practical terms, the NVIDIA card delivers more than four-and-a-half times the Vulkan performance of the Intel integrated solution.

The magnitude of these deltas is important context for interpreting the average benchmark scores. The Quadro M4000 carries an average benchmark score of 5,467, while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 sits at 5,370, a difference of only 1.8%. This near-parity in aggregate scoring is misleading, as it is heavily influenced by the fact that the Quadro M4000 has ten benchmark entries (including several Passmark tests) while the Intel part has only two. The two Geekbench tests where they directly compete tell the real story: the discrete NVIDIA card dominates in every measurable compute scenario.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides additional perspective. The Quadro M4000’s closest competitor in the database is the AMD Radeon R7 M440 with an average score of 5,483, a negligible 0.3% difference. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M sits just 0.6% ahead at 5,501, and the GeForce MX130 is 0.7% ahead at 5,508. For the Intel UHD Graphics P630, its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 M365X at 5,416, which is 0.8% behind, while the NVIDIA GeForce 930A is 1% behind at 5,317. The percentile rankings are similarly close: the Quadro M4000 sits at the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, and the Intel part at the 31st percentile. This indicates that while their aggregate positions in the database are similar, the nature of their performance profiles is entirely different, one is a compute-capable discrete card, the other an entry-level integrated unit.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two parts is vast. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 is built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, using the GM204 chip fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The die contains 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² area, yielding a transistor density of 13.1 million per square millimeter. The Intel UHD Graphics P630, by contrast, uses the Comet Lake GT2 chip on Intel’s Generation 9.5 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm+++ process. No transistor count, die size, or density figures are available for the Intel part, but the process node disparity alone suggests a fundamentally different design philosophy.

The compute resources are starkly different. The Quadro M4000 has 1,664 shading units, 104 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units. The Intel UHD Graphics P630 has 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and just 3 ROPs. This translates to a pixel rate of 49.47 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 80.39 GTexel/s for the NVIDIA card, versus 3.600 GPixel/s and 28.80 GTexel/s for the Intel part. The FP32 compute throughput is 2.573 TFLOPS for the Quadro M4000 and 460.8 GFLOPS for the Intel UHD Graphics P630, a factor of roughly 5.6x in favor of the discrete card. Notably, the Intel part does have FP16 capability at 921.6 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while no FP16 figure is listed for the Quadro M4000.

Memory architecture is another major differentiator. The Quadro M4000 comes with 8 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 192.3 GB/s of bandwidth, with memory clocked at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective). The Intel UHD Graphics P630 uses system shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth and bus width, and its base clock is 350 MHz with a boost of 1200 MHz. The NVIDIA card’s memory interface is a PCIe 3.0 x16 slot with a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 120 W TDP, while the Intel part is an IGP on a Ring Bus with a 15 W TDP and no dedicated power connectors.

The feature sets also differ in their API support. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, but the Quadro M4000 supports Vulkan 1.4 while the Intel part tops out at Vulkan 1.3. Display outputs are another contrast: the Quadro M4000 offers 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs and is a single-slot card measuring 241 mm (9.5 inches) in length and 111 mm (4.4 inches) in height. The Intel UHD Graphics P630’s display outputs are motherboard dependent, with no physical dimensions applicable. The Quadro M4000’s suggested PSU is 300 W, while no such figure exists for the integrated Intel part.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 has an average benchmark score of 5,467, which is 1.8% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics P630’s 5,370. However, this aggregate comparison is based on different test sets, the Quadro M4000 has ten benchmark entries, while the Intel part has only two.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the Vulkan compute test?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 scores 24,640 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 337.8% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics P630’s 5,628. This is the largest head-to-head margin between the two parts.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two chips?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M4000’s GM204 chip contains 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die. No transistor count or die size is listed for the Intel UHD Graphics P630’s Comet Lake GT2 chip.

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 delivers 2.573 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to 460.8 GFLOPS for the Intel UHD Graphics P630. This makes the Quadro M4000 approximately 5.6 times faster in single-precision compute.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX and OpenGL versions?

A: Yes, both the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 and Intel UHD Graphics P630 support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. They differ in Vulkan support, with the Quadro M4000 supporting Vulkan 1.4 and the Intel part supporting Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 has 192.3 GB/s of bandwidth from its 8 GB GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus. The Intel UHD Graphics P630 uses system shared memory, and its bandwidth is listed as system dependent.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 is the superior performer in every measurable category. In the two head-to-head benchmarks, it wins by margins of 274.1% in OpenCL and 337.8% in Vulkan. Its compute resources dwarf the Intel part, 1,664 shading units versus 192, 64 ROPs versus 3, and 2.573 TFLOPS versus 460.8 GFLOPS in FP32. The Quadro M4000 also has dedicated 8 GB GDDR5 memory with 192.3 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the Intel part depends on system shared memory with system-dependent performance.

The Intel UHD Graphics P630’s strengths are entirely in the domain of integration and power. As an IGP with a 15 W TDP, it requires no discrete power connector, no PCIe slot, and its display outputs are motherboard dependent. It is a suitable solution for basic graphics output and light compute tasks, but the benchmark data shows it is not competitive with the Quadro M4000 in any compute workload where they overlap.

The percentile rankings reflect the broader context: the Quadro M4000 sits at the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, and the Intel UHD Graphics P630 at the 31st. Their nearest rivals in the database are similarly positioned, with the Quadro M4000 trading places with the AMD Radeon R7 M440 (0.3% behind), AMD Radeon 610M (0.4% ahead), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M (0.6% behind), and NVIDIA GeForce MX130 (0.7% behind). The Intel part’s nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R7 M445 (0.2% ahead), AMD Radeon R7 M365X (0.8% behind), NVIDIA GeForce 840M (0.9% ahead), and NVIDIA GeForce 930A (1% ahead). These figures place both parts in the same general performance tier for aggregate scoring, but this is an artifact of the differing benchmark suites. Where they directly compete, the Quadro M4000 wins decisively.

For users requiring discrete compute performance, dedicated memory bandwidth, or Vulkan 1.4 support, the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 is the clear choice from the data. For systems where integration, low power draw, and motherboard-dependent output flexibility are paramount, the Intel UHD Graphics P630 serves a different purpose entirely, but it cannot substitute for the Quadro M4000’s compute capabilities.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification field. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 uses the GM204 chip on Maxwell 2.0 architecture with a 28 nm process and 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 uses the Comet Lake GT2 chip on Generation 9.5 architecture with a 14 nm+++ process and no listed transistor or die data. The Quadro M4000 has 1,664 shading units, 104 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, versus 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 3 ROPs for the Intel part.

Memory specifications are entirely different: the Quadro M4000 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 192.3 GB/s bandwidth and a 1502 MHz memory clock (6 Gbps effective), while the Intel part uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The Quadro M4000’s pixel rate is 49.47 GPixel/s and texture rate is 80.39 GTexel/s, compared to 3.600 GPixel/s and 28.80 GTexel/s for the Intel part. FP32 performance is 2.573 TFLOPS versus 460.8 GFLOPS; the Intel part also lists FP16 at 921.6 GFLOPS (2:1), while the Quadro M4000 has no FP16 figure.

Power and physical specifications diverge completely: the Quadro M4000 has a 120 W TDP, is single-slot, requires a 1x 6-pin power connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU, while the Intel part has a 15 W TDP, is an IGP with no power connectors or PSU recommendation. The Quadro M4000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and offers 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus with motherboard-dependent display outputs. The Quadro M4000 measures 241 mm by 111 mm; the Intel part has no dimensions. API support differs only in Vulkan: 1.4 for the Quadro M4000 versus 1.3 for the Intel part. The Quadro M4000 was released on 2015-06-28, and the Intel UHD Graphics P630 on 2020-05-12, with the NVIDIA part having a predecessor (Quadro Kepler) and successor (Quadro Pascal), while the Intel part has neither listed.