Intel UHD Graphics P750 vs NVIDIA Quadro M5000M Comparison

Intel UHD Graphics P750 is an integrated graphics solution from Intel, built on the Generation 12.1 architecture and Rocket Lake chip, while the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M is a dedicated mobile workstation GPU based on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture and GM204 chip. In the only shared benchmark, the Quadro M5000M delivers a dominant victory, scoring 22,920 in Geekbench OpenCL against the P750’s 6,554, a 71.4% lead. However, the average benchmark scores tell a more nuanced story, with the P750 posting an average of 6,554 and the Quadro M5000M averaging 6,481, placing the Intel part slightly ahead by 1.1% in that aggregate metric. The data indicates these are fundamentally different products: one is a low-power integrated GPU for general computing, and the other is a high-performance discrete module for professional workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M5000M scores 22,920 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 71.4% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics P750’s score of 6,554. This is the only benchmark where both GPUs have directly comparable results.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics P750 has an average benchmark score of 6,554, while the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M has an average of 6,481. This means the P750 is 1.1% ahead of the Quadro M5000M in average performance across all their respective tested benchmarks.

Q: What is the performance difference between the P750 and its closest rival?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics P750’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon HD 7730M, which scores 6,581. The P750 trails that rival by 0.4%. It also sits 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M and 0.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M.

Q: How does the Quadro M5000M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Quadro M5000M’s closest rival is the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile, which scores 6,476. The Quadro M5000M leads that rival by 0.1%. It trails the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M by 0.2% and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M by 0.5%.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics P750 ranks in the 38th percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M ranks in the 37th percentile. This places both parts in the lower-middle range of the overall GPU performance distribution.

Q: What are the production statuses of these two GPUs?

A: Both the Intel UHD Graphics P750 and the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M are listed as end-of-life products. The Quadro M5000M has a specific release date of August 17, 2015, while the P750’s release date is not provided.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial, reflecting their different design goals. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 is built on Intel’s Generation 12.1 architecture, using the Rocket Lake chip, and is manufactured on a 14 nm+++ process node at Intel’s own foundry. In contrast, the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M uses the Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM204 chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The Quadro M5000M is a much larger and more complex chip, with 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 13.1 million per square millimeter. The P750’s transistor count and die size are not specified, but it is clearly a much smaller design given its integrated nature.

The execution resources differ dramatically. The Quadro M5000M features 1,536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operations pipelines. The P750 has only 256 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This 6x advantage in shading units for the NVIDIA part directly explains its massive lead in compute-heavy workloads. The clock speeds also favor the discrete GPU, with the Quadro M5000M running at a base clock of 962 MHz and a boost clock of 1,051 MHz, while the P750 operates at a base of 350 MHz and boosts to 1,300 MHz. Although the Intel part has a higher boost clock, its far fewer execution units cannot compensate for the NVIDIA part’s raw parallel horsepower.

Memory architecture is another key differentiator. The Quadro M5000M has 8 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.4 GB/s of bandwidth and running at 1,253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The P750 uses system shared memory, with its type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as “System Shared” or “System Dependent.” This means the Intel GPU must rely on the system’s main memory, which is typically slower and shared with the CPU. The Quadro M5000M also has a much higher thermal design power at 100 W, compared to the P750’s 15 W, underscoring the discrete card’s need for dedicated power and cooling versus the integrated chip’s efficiency.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

In the single benchmark where both GPUs have comparable results, the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M is the clear winner. The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the Quadro M5000M scoring 22,920, which is 71.4% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics P750’s score of 6,554. This result is decisive and aligns with the architectural differences: the Quadro M5000M’s 1,536 shading units and dedicated GDDR5 memory provide a massive advantage in compute tasks that scale with parallel execution and memory bandwidth. The P750’s 256 shading units and shared memory architecture simply cannot compete in this type of workload.

The delta of -71.4% indicates the P750 is severely outpaced, and this is the only head-to-head benchmark available in the data. This means that for any OpenCL-based application, the Quadro M5000M would deliver roughly three and a half times the performance of the P750. While the P750 does have additional benchmark data in the form of its average score, the Quadro M5000M has a broader suite of tests, including PassMark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, as well as PassMark G2D, G3D, and GPU Compute. In those tests, the Quadro M5000M scores 119 in DirectX 9, 35 in DirectX 10, 54 in DirectX 11, 29 in DirectX 12, 476 in G2D, 7,062 in G3D, and 2,756 in GPU Compute. The P750 lacks comparable results for these tests, so the direct comparison is limited to the OpenCL score.

The Verdict

The data clearly shows that the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M is the superior performer for demanding graphical and compute workloads, despite its lower average benchmark score. The 71.4% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is the most significant datapoint, as it represents a direct apples-to-apples comparison. The Quadro M5000M’s 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 160.4 GB/s of dedicated memory bandwidth give it overwhelming advantages in raw throughput. Its pixel rate of 67.26 GPixel/s and texture rate of 100.9 GTexel/s are far higher than the P750’s 41.60 GPixel/s and 83.20 GTexel/s, respectively. For professional users running CAD, 3D rendering, or GPU-accelerated compute, the Quadro M5000M is the only viable choice based on this evidence.

However, the Intel UHD Graphics P750 is not without merit. Its average benchmark score of 6,554 is 1.1% higher than the Quadro M5000M’s 6,481, and it ranks in the 38th percentile versus the Quadro’s 37th. The P750 also consumes just 15 W of power, compared to the Quadro M5000M’s 100 W, making it far more suitable for battery-powered thin-and-light laptops where efficiency is paramount. The P750’s boost clock of 1,300 MHz is also higher than the Quadro’s 1,051 MHz, which helps in lightly threaded tasks. The verdict is straightforward: the Quadro M5000M wins decisively on performance, while the P750 wins on efficiency and integration.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 uses a 14 nm+++ process node from Intel, while the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M uses a 28 nm node from TSMC. The Quadro M5000M has 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die with a density of 13.1 million per square millimeter; the P750’s transistor count and die size are not provided. The Quadro M5000M has 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, versus the P750’s 256 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Quadro M5000M’s base clock is 962 MHz and boost is 1,051 MHz, while the P750’s base is 350 MHz and boost is 1,300 MHz.

Memory is another major divergence: the Quadro M5000M has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the P750 uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The Quadro M5000M’s memory clock is 1,253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), whereas the P750’s memory clock is listed as “System Shared.” The Quadro M5000M has a TDP of 100 W and uses an MXM Module slot width with an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, while the P750 has a 15 W TDP and uses an IGP slot width with a Ring Bus interface. The Quadro M5000M has no power connectors, and its display outputs are portable device dependent, while the P750’s display outputs are motherboard dependent. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but the Quadro M5000M has no public FP16 rating, while the P750 offers 1,331.2 GFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The Quadro M5000M’s FP32 performance is 3.229 TFLOPS, versus the P750’s 665.6 GFLOPS.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro M5000M wins in all compute-intensive scenarios. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 22,920 versus the P750’s 6,554 demonstrates its dominance in OpenCL acceleration, which is used in scientific computing, video encoding, and machine learning inference. The Quadro M5000M’s 3.229 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 67.26 GPixel/s pixel rate make it suitable for professional 3D rendering and high-resolution display output. Its 8 GB of GDDR5 memory with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth is also critical for large textures and datasets, which the P750’s shared memory cannot handle efficiently. The Quadro M5000M’s PassMark G3D score of 7,062 further indicates strong gaming and 3D application performance, though its DirectX scores (119 in DX9, 35 in DX10, 54 in DX11, 29 in DX12) suggest it has varying legacy API performance.

The Intel UHD Graphics P750 wins in efficiency and integration. Its 15 W TDP is a fraction of the Quadro M5000M’s 100 W, making it ideal for ultra-portable devices where battery life and thermal management are critical. The P750’s higher boost clock of 1,300 MHz helps in bursty, single-threaded tasks, and its Ring Bus interface is designed for tight CPU-GPU integration. The P750’s average benchmark score of 6,554, which is 1.1% higher than the Quadro M5000M’s average, suggests that in mixed or less demanding workloads, the Intel part can hold its own. For users who prioritize low power consumption, silent operation, and basic graphical output for office productivity or media playback, the P750 is the logical choice, while the Quadro M5000M is the undisputed winner for heavy lifting.