Intel UHD Graphics P630 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database records only two shared tests between the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 and the Intel UHD Graphics P630, and the results are decisively one-sided. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro P2000 scores 20,125 points against the Intel part's 5,111 points, a delta of 293.8% in favor of the discrete NVIDIA card. The gap widens further in Geekbench Vulkan, where the Quadro P2000 hits 23,566 points while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 manages 5,628 points, a 318.7% advantage. These are not marginal differences; the NVIDIA part more than triples the Intel integrated graphics in both compute and modern graphics API workloads.

Looking at the broader context, the Quadro P2000's average benchmark score of 6,049 places it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals, the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 with an average score of 6,077 and the NVIDIA RTX A400 at 6,078, sit within 0.5% of its score, indicating a tightly clustered performance tier. The AMD Radeon 760M trails by a mere 0.5% with 6,019, and the AMD Radeon RX 6400 comes in at 6,001, 0.8% behind. The Quadro P2000 is effectively level with these competitors, a strong showing for a workstation card from the Pascal generation.

The Intel UHD Graphics P630, by contrast, holds a 31st percentile ranking with an average benchmark score of 5,370. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R7 M445 at 5,358 (0.2% behind the Intel part), the AMD Radeon R7 M365X at 5,416 (0.8% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce 840M at 5,322 (0.9% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce 930A at 5,317 (1% behind). The Intel integrated solution competes with older, low-end discrete mobile GPUs, but it sits roughly 670 points below the Quadro P2000's average. That difference translates into a substantial real-world gap in compute-heavy tasks and gaming workloads.

The head-to-head data is clear: the Quadro P2000 wins both recorded tests, and the margin is enormous. In OpenCL, the 293.8% delta means the NVIDIA card delivers nearly four times the compute throughput. In Vulkan, the 318.7% delta pushes that to more than four times. The Intel UHD Graphics P630 is not in the same performance class, and no benchmark in the database suggests any scenario where it closes that chasm.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 is built on the Pascal architecture with the GP106 chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 16 nm process. It packs 4,400 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 22.0 million per square millimeter. The Intel UHD Graphics P630 uses the Generation 9.5 architecture with the Comet Lake GT2 chip, manufactured by Intel on a 14 nm+++ process. The database lists no transistor count, die size, or density for the Intel part, reflecting its integrated nature.

The compute resources differ sharply. The Quadro P2000 features 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 40 render output units. The Intel UHD Graphics P630 has 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and just 3 ROPs. That is an 81% reduction in shading units, a 63% reduction in TMUs, and a 92.5% reduction in ROPs. The pixel rate tells the story: the Quadro P2000 delivers 59.20 GPixel/s against the Intel part's 3.600 GPixel/s, a more than 16-fold difference. Texture rate follows suit, with 94.72 GTexel/s versus 28.80 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds and memory configurations further separate the pair. The Quadro P2000 runs at a 1076 MHz base clock with a 1480 MHz boost, paired with 5 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 140.2 GB/s of bandwidth and a 1752 MHz memory clock (7 Gbps effective). The Intel part has a 350 MHz base clock and a 1200 MHz boost, but its memory is system shared: shared size, shared type, shared bus width, and system-dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA card's dedicated memory is a decisive advantage for sustained workloads, as it does not contend with the CPU for bandwidth.

Power and physical characteristics diverge as well. The Quadro P2000 has a 75 W TDP, is single-slot, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W system PSU. It interfaces via PCIe 3.0 x16 and offers four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The Intel UHD Graphics P630 is an IGP with a 15 W TDP, uses a Ring Bus interface, and its display outputs are motherboard dependent. The NVIDIA part is a standalone card measuring 196 mm in length and 111 mm in height; the Intel part has no listed dimensions because it lives on the CPU die.

Feature support is closer than the raw specs suggest. Both parts support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. The Quadro P2000 lists Vulkan 1.4 support, while the Intel part lists Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA card's FP32 throughput is 3.031 TFLOPS, and its FP16 rate is 47.36 GFLOPS at a 1:64 ratio. The Intel part delivers 460.8 GFLOPS FP32 and 921.6 GFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning the Intel silicon is relatively stronger at half-precision math but still far behind in absolute terms.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 20,125 points, beating the Intel UHD Graphics P630's 5,111 points by 293.8%.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: The Quadro P2000 records 23,566 points versus 5,628 points for the Intel part, a 318.7% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The Quadro P2000 has an average benchmark score of 6,049, while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 averages 5,370. The NVIDIA card sits in the 35th percentile of all GPUs; the Intel part sits in the 31st percentile.

Q: How does the Quadro P2000 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX230 and RTX A400 both average 6,077 and 6,078 respectively, each within 0.5% of the Quadro P2000's score. The AMD Radeon 760M is 0.5% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 6400 is 0.8% behind.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each GPU?

A: The Quadro P2000 has 5 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 160-bit bus with 140.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel UHD Graphics P630 uses system shared memory with a system shared bus width and system dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Quadro P2000 has 1,024 shading units, compared to 192 on the Intel UHD Graphics P630. The NVIDIA part also has 64 TMUs versus 24, and 40 ROPs versus 3.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro P2000 | Intel UHD Graphics P630 |

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

| Architecture | Pascal | Generation 9.5 |

| Chip | GP106 | Comet Lake GT2 |

| Process Node | 16 nm | 14 nm+++ |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 4,400 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | Not listed |

| Transistor Density | 22.0M / mm² | Not listed |

| Base Clock | 1076 MHz | 350 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1480 MHz | 1200 MHz |

| Memory Size | 5 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 160 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 140.2 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 192 |

| TMUs | 64 | 24 |

| ROPs | 40 | 3 |

| Pixel Rate | 59.20 GPixel/s | 3.600 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 94.72 GTexel/s | 28.80 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.031 TFLOPS | 460.8 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 47.36 GFLOPS (1:64) | 921.6 GFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 15 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | Not listed |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | Ring Bus |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | Motherboard Dependent |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2017-02-05 | 2020-05-12 |

| Dimensions | 196 mm length, 111 mm height | Not listed |

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 is the superior GPU for any workload that stresses compute or graphics throughput. It wins both recorded head-to-head benchmarks, with deltas of 293.8% in OpenCL and 318.7% in Vulkan. Its average benchmark score of 6,049 places it 11.2% above the Intel part's 5,370, and it holds a higher percentile ranking at 35 versus 31. The Quadro P2000's dedicated 5 GB GDDR5 memory, 160-bit bus, and 140.2 GB/s bandwidth eliminate the system-memory contention that hampers the Intel integrated solution.

For users running professional applications, CAD workloads, or any GPU-accelerated compute, the Quadro P2000 is the clear choice. Its Pascal architecture, 1,024 shading units, and 3.031 TFLOPS FP32 throughput provide a level of performance that the Intel UHD Graphics P630 cannot approach. The Intel part, with its 192 shading units, 3 ROPs, and 460.8 GFLOPS FP32, is suited only to basic display output and light 2D tasks. Its 15 W TDP makes it efficient, but efficiency without performance is of little use in a workstation context.

The Quadro P2000 also matches or exceeds its nearest rivals in the database. It sits within 0.5% of the GeForce MX230 and RTX A400, and it leads the Radeon 760M and RX 6400 by 0.5% and 0.8%, respectively. The Intel part, meanwhile, trades blows with the Radeon R7 M445, R7 M365X, GeForce 840M, and GeForce 930A, all of which are older or lower-end parts. The verdict is straightforward: pick the Quadro P2000 for any serious GPU work, and reserve the Intel UHD Graphics P630 for systems where its integrated nature is a requirement and performance expectations are minimal.