GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro M500M and Intel UHD Graphics P630 represent two fundamentally different approaches to integrated and mobile graphics, with the data revealing a split decision across the two available benchmark tests. Each GPU claims a victory in one of the two Geekbench tests, making the choice between them entirely dependent on the specific workload in question.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test delivers a decisive win for the NVIDIA Quadro M500M. The discrete mobile GPU scores 5,986 points, while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 manages only 5,111 points. This represents a 17.1% advantage for the NVIDIA part, a substantial margin that suggests the Quadro M500M holds a clear edge in compute-heavy tasks that leverage OpenCL acceleration. The delta is significant enough that users running OpenCL-based applications would notice a tangible performance difference between the two.

However, the tables turn in the Vulkan benchmark. Here, the Intel UHD Graphics P630 posts a score of 5,628 points, surpassing the Quadro M500M's 5,222 points by 7.2%. This is a notable reversal, as the integrated Intel solution outperforms the discrete NVIDIA part in this particular graphics API test. The Vulkan result indicates that the Intel GPU's architecture handles this modern API more efficiently, despite its lower raw compute specifications.

The overall average benchmark scores reflect this split. The Quadro M500M averages 5,604 points across both tests, while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 averages 5,370 points. This gives the NVIDIA part a modest overall edge, but the individual test results tell a more nuanced story. The Quadro M500M's average places it 4.4% higher than the Intel part, yet the Intel solution's Vulkan win demonstrates that API choice can fundamentally alter the performance hierarchy.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the Quadro M500M sits in the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 rests just one point lower at the 31st percentile. These nearly identical percentile rankings confirm that the two parts are closely matched overall. The Quadro M500M's nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro M4000, which trails by 1.2%, and the NVIDIA GeForce MX130, which the Quadro leads by 1.7%. The Intel UHD Graphics P630's closest competitor is the AMD Radeon R7 M445, which is virtually tied with a 0.2% delta, while the NVIDIA GeForce 840M sits 0.9% behind.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial. The NVIDIA Quadro M500M is built on the Maxwell architecture using the GM108S chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This discrete solution contains 1,020 million transistors packed into a 77 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.2 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel UHD Graphics P630, in contrast, uses the Comet Lake GT2 chip based on Intel's Generation 9.5 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm+++ process at Intel's own foundries. Intel does not disclose transistor count or die size for this part, but the process node difference is telling, the newer 14 nm+++ process is more advanced than the 28 nm process used by NVIDIA.

The memory configuration further separates these two parts. The Quadro M500M features 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel UHD Graphics P630 relies entirely on system shared memory, with no dedicated VRAM. Its memory type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent," meaning performance scales with the host system's memory configuration. This is a fundamental architectural difference: the NVIDIA part has guaranteed memory bandwidth, while the Intel part's memory performance is variable and dependent on the platform.

Core configurations also diverge significantly. The Quadro M500M packs 384 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units. The Intel UHD Graphics P630 counters with 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and only 3 ROPs. The NVIDIA part has double the shading units and nearly triple the ROPs, but the Intel part has 50% more TMUs. These differences manifest in the calculated pixel and texture rates: the Quadro M500M achieves 8.992 GPixel/s and 17.98 GTexel/s, while the Intel part reaches 3.600 GPixel/s and 28.80 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA GPU clearly excels at pixel fill, while the Intel GPU has a substantial lead in texture fill.

Clock speeds tell another story. The Quadro M500M operates at a 1029 MHz base clock with a 1124 MHz boost, while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 runs at a much lower 350 MHz base but boosts up to 1200 MHz. The Intel part's higher boost clock partially compensates for its lower core count, but the NVIDIA part's higher base clock suggests more consistent sustained performance. In terms of floating-point compute, the Quadro M500M delivers 863.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel part provides 460.8 GFLOPS, the NVIDIA GPU is 87% faster in raw FP32 throughput. The Intel part does support FP16 at 921.6 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, a feature the Quadro M500M does not list.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M500M averages 5,604 points, which is 4.4% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics P630's 5,370-point average. However, the Intel part wins the Vulkan test while the NVIDIA part wins OpenCL.

Q: How does the Intel UHD Graphics P630 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel part is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon R7 M445, which trails by just 0.2%. It leads the NVIDIA GeForce 840M by 0.9% and the NVIDIA GeForce 930A by 1%, but trails the AMD Radeon R7 M365X by 0.8%.

Q: What memory configurations do these two GPUs use?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M500M uses 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel UHD Graphics P630 uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, meaning it has no dedicated VRAM.

Q: Which GPU is better for Vulkan-based applications?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics P630 wins the Vulkan benchmark with 5,628 points, beating the NVIDIA Quadro M500M's 5,222 points by 7.2%. This is despite the NVIDIA part's higher overall average score.

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

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M500M packs 1,020 million transistors into a 77 mm² die for a density of 13.2 million transistors per square millimeter. Intel does not disclose transistor count or die size for the UHD Graphics P630.

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M500M has 384 shading units, exactly double the 192 shading units found in the Intel UHD Graphics P630. The NVIDIA part also has 8 ROPs versus the Intel part's 3 ROPs, but the Intel part has 24 TMUs compared to NVIDIA's 16.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The manufacturing process separates them most fundamentally: NVIDIA uses a 28 nm process at TSMC, while Intel uses a 14 nm+++ process at its own foundries. The NVIDIA chip contains 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, while Intel does not disclose these figures for the UHD Graphics P630.

Memory configuration could not be more different. The Quadro M500M has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, meaning its performance relies entirely on the host system's RAM.

Core counts reveal a mixed picture. The Quadro M500M has 384 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 has 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 3 ROPs. Clock speeds show the NVIDIA part running at 1029 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost, while the Intel part runs at 350 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost.

Calculated throughput rates favor each GPU in different areas. The Quadro M500M achieves 8.992 GPixel/s and 17.98 GTexel/s, while the Intel part reaches 3.600 GPixel/s and 28.80 GTexel/s. FP32 performance strongly favors NVIDIA at 863.2 GFLOPS versus 460.8 GFLOPS, but the Intel part offers FP16 at 921.6 GFLOPS while the NVIDIA part lists no FP16 capability.

Power and interface specifications also differ. The Quadro M500M carries a 30 W TDP and uses an MXM-A (3.0) bus interface with an MXM Module slot width. The Intel UHD Graphics P630 has a 15 W TDP and uses a Ring Bus interface as an IGP. The NVIDIA part supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA GPU was released on April 26, 2016, while the Intel part came later on May 12, 2020.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that neither GPU is a universal winner. The NVIDIA Quadro M500M takes the OpenCL test with a 17.1% margin, while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 claims the Vulkan test with a 7.2% advantage. Users who prioritize OpenCL acceleration, common in certain professional and scientific applications, should lean toward the Quadro M500M. Those whose workloads use Vulkan should favor the Intel part.

The overall average scores slightly favor the Quadro M500M, but the margin is thin. The NVIDIA part's 32nd percentile ranking versus Intel's 31st percentile confirms they are closely matched in the broader GPU landscape. The Quadro M500M's dedicated 2 GB of DDR3 memory provides a consistency advantage, as its 14.40 GB/s bandwidth is fixed, whereas the Intel part's system-dependent memory performance can vary widely based on platform configuration.

The Quadro M500M's double shading unit count and 87% higher FP32 throughput suggest it is the better choice for compute-heavy tasks that do not rely on Vulkan. However, the Intel UHD Graphics P630's higher texture rate and FP16 support indicate strengths in texture-bound workloads and applications that can leverage half-precision arithmetic. The Intel part's much lower 15 W TDP also makes it more suitable for power-constrained environments, though the Quadro's 30 W TDP is still modest for a discrete GPU.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro M500M wins decisively in OpenCL compute workloads, posting a 5,986 score that beats the Intel UHD Graphics P630 by 17.1%. This advantage aligns with its higher FP32 throughput of 863.2 GFLOPS and its dedicated memory subsystem. The 2 GB of DDR3 memory with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth ensures consistent performance regardless of system configuration, making the Quadro M500M the more reliable choice for OpenCL-based professional applications.

The Intel UHD Graphics P630 wins the Vulkan benchmark with a 5,628 score, outperforming the Quadro M500M by 7.2%. Its superior texture fill rate of 28.80 GTexel/s, achieved through 24 TMUs, likely contributes to this result. The Intel part also supports FP16 at 921.6 GFLOPS, which could benefit Vulkan applications that utilize half-precision operations. Additionally, the Intel UHD Graphics P630's newer DirectX 12 (12_1) support and lower 15 W TDP make it a stronger candidate for modern, power-efficient systems despite its older release date in 2020 versus 2016 for the NVIDIA part.