Intel UHD Graphics P750 vs NVIDIA Quadro K620 Comparison

Intel UHD Graphics P750 and NVIDIA Quadro K620 are both end-of-life graphics solutions, but they target fundamentally different segments: one is an integrated processor graphics unit, the other a dedicated workstation card. Benchmark data from Geekbench shows the discrete Quadro holds a narrow edge in compute workloads, though the integrated Intel part trails by only a small margin in raw OpenCL performance, making the comparison closer than raw specifications might suggest.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are remarkably tight. The NVIDIA Quadro K620 scores 6,693 points, while the Intel UHD Graphics P750 scores 6,554 points. That gives the Quadro a win by a delta of -2.1% from Intel's perspective, meaning the Intel part is about 2% slower in this specific workload. In practical terms, this is nearly a statistical tie — a difference of 139 points out of roughly 6,600 is well within run-to-run variance for most OpenCL workloads.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, both GPUs sit in a similar performance tier. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 holds a 38th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with its nearest rival being the AMD Radeon HD 7730M at 6,581 points (a -0.4% delta), followed closely by the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M at 6,513 points (a +0.6% delta). The Intel part also edges out the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M by 0.9%, scoring 6,554 versus 6,493. The spread across these four rivals is just 119 points, which underscores how crowded this performance band is.

The NVIDIA Quadro K620, meanwhile, ranks at the 36th percentile, slightly lower than Intel's 38th percentile despite winning the head-to-head. This apparent contradiction is explained by its average benchmark score of 6,282, which is dragged down by a second benchmark result: the Quadro scores 5,870 in Geekbench Vulkan, a significantly lower figure than its OpenCL result. The K620's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER and RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102, both averaging 6,270 points (a +0.2% delta from the Quadro), along with the AMD Radeon R7 M350 at 6,327 points (-0.7%) and AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 at 6,330 points (-0.8%). These rival deltas are all within a single percentage point, reinforcing that the Quadro K620 sits in a tightly contested mid-range band.

The single head-to-head result is the whole story for direct comparison: in OpenCL, the Quadro K620 wins by a 2.1% margin. No Vulkan or other benchmark data exists for the Intel P750, so the Quadro's Vulkan score of 5,870 cannot be compared directly. What the data does show is that both parts are competitive with a cluster of older mobile and entry-level discrete GPUs, and neither one breaks out of the 36–38 percentile range globally.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the NVIDIA Quadro K620 is the better choice for pure compute performance. It wins the only direct benchmark comparison, posting 6,693 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 6,554 for the Intel UHD Graphics P750. That 2.1% advantage is modest, but it is a win nonetheless, and the Quadro also offers a second data point in Vulkan where it reaches 5,870 points. If you are looking at raw benchmark scores, the Quadro is the stronger part.

However, the Intel UHD Graphics P750 has a compelling counterargument: it achieves nearly identical OpenCL performance while consuming only 15 W of power, compared to the Quadro's 45 W TDP. The Intel part is an integrated GPU with system-shared memory, meaning it requires no separate card, no power connectors, and no extra cooling. For a system where a discrete GPU is impractical or where power efficiency is paramount, the P750 delivers about 98% of the Quadro's OpenCL performance at one-third the power draw. The P750 also holds a slightly higher global percentile (38th versus 36th), indicating that its single benchmark result places it marginally better among all GPUs.

The Quadro K620 counters with dedicated memory: 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth, versus the P750's system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. For workstation tasks that are sensitive to memory bandwidth — such as texture-heavy workloads or large data sets — the Quadro's dedicated VRAM is a structural advantage that benchmark scores alone may not fully capture. The Quadro also supports two display outputs (1x DVI and 1x DisplayPort 1.2) whereas the P750's outputs are motherboard-dependent.

In summary: pick the Intel UHD Graphics P750 if you need integrated graphics with low power consumption and can rely on system memory. Pick the NVIDIA Quadro K620 if you want a dedicated, single-slot card with its own VRAM and a slight compute edge. The data does not support a decisive victory for either — it supports a narrow win for the Quadro in benchmarks, balanced by the P750's efficiency advantages.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the head-to-head OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K620 wins with a score of 6,693, beating the Intel UHD Graphics P750's 6,554 by a delta of -2.1% from Intel's perspective.

Q: How does the Intel UHD Graphics P750 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The P750 scores 6,554, which is 0.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M (6,493), 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M (6,513), 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon HD 7730M (6,581), and 0.9% behind the AMD Radeon R7 M460 (6,612).

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the NVIDIA Quadro K620?

A: The Quadro K620 has an average benchmark score of 6,282, which combines its Geekbench OpenCL result of 6,693 and its Geekbench Vulkan result of 5,870.

Q: Do the two GPUs have different power requirements?

A: Yes. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 has a TDP of 15 W and is an integrated GPU (IGP) with no power connectors. The NVIDIA Quadro K620 has a TDP of 45 W, is a single-slot card, requires no power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 200 W.

Q: Which GPU has a higher global percentile ranking?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics P750 ranks at the 38th percentile among all GPUs, while the NVIDIA Quadro K620 ranks at the 36th percentile.

Q: Does the Quadro K620 have any benchmark results in APIs other than OpenCL?

A: Yes, the Quadro K620 also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 5,870. The Intel P750 has no Vulkan benchmark data available in the provided records.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ substantially in their core configurations. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 employs 256 shading units, 64 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster operation units (ROPs). The NVIDIA Quadro K620, by contrast, has 384 shading units but only 24 TMUs and 16 ROPs. This means the Intel part has significantly more texture and pixel throughput per clock — its texture rate is 83.20 GTexel/s versus 26.98 GTexel/s for the Quadro, and its pixel rate is 41.60 GPixel/s versus 17.98 GPixel/s. However, the Quadro has higher raw FP32 compute: 863.2 GFLOPS versus 665.6 GFLOPS for the Intel part.

Memory configurations are also fundamentally different. The Intel P750 uses system-shared memory with a system-shared bus width and system-dependent bandwidth. The Quadro K620 has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth. Clock speeds differ as well: the Intel part runs at a base of 350 MHz with a boost of 1300 MHz, while the Quadro has a base of 1058 MHz and a boost of 1124 MHz. The Quadro also lists a memory clock of 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective).

Physical and interface specifications diverge sharply. The Intel P750 is an integrated GPU with a Ring Bus interface and motherboard-dependent display outputs. The Quadro K620 is a single-slot card measuring 160 mm in length and 69 mm in height, using a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface, with display outputs of 1x DVI and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. The Quadro requires a 200 W suggested PSU, while the Intel part has no such requirement. The Quadro's process node is 28 nm from TSMC, with 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die (12.6M transistors per mm²).

Architecture Differences

The Intel UHD Graphics P750 is built on Intel's Rocket Lake chip using the Generation 12.1 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm+++ process at Intel's own foundry. Its generation is listed as "HD Graphics-W (Rocket Lake)." The NVIDIA Quadro K620 is built on the GM107 chip using the Maxwell architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. Its generation is listed as "Quadro Kepler (Kx200)," which is notable because the chip itself is Maxwell-based — the generation label appears to refer to the product lineage rather than the underlying architecture.

The Intel part supports FP16 compute at 1,331.2 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the Quadro K620 lists no FP16 capability at all. Both GPUs support DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but there is a key difference: the Intel P750 supports DirectX 12 at feature level 12_1, while the Quadro K620 supports DirectX 12 at the lower feature level 11_0. This means the Intel integrated GPU has a more capable DirectX feature set despite its lower raw FP32 throughput.

The Quadro K620 has a known release date of July 21, 2014, and its product lineage is documented: its predecessor is Quadro Fermi and its successor is Quadro Maxwell. The Intel P750 has no release date, predecessor, or successor listed in the data. The Quadro's transistor count and die size are specified (1,870 million and 148 mm²), while the Intel part lists neither. Both products are marked as end-of-life in production status.