Intel UHD Graphics P750 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Comparison

Intel UHD Graphics P750 and NVIDIA Quadro P2000 represent two fundamentally different approaches to graphics processing, with the data showing a decisive performance gap between them. The single head-to-head benchmark available in the database, Geekbench OpenCL, reveals the Quadro P2000 scoring 20,125 against the Intel UHD Graphics P750's 6,554, a delta of -67.4% for the Intel part. This places the Quadro P2000 at roughly three times the raw compute performance of the integrated Intel solution, a margin that defines their respective positions in the market.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it is not close. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 delivers 20,125 points, while the Intel UHD Graphics P750 manages 6,554 points. The delta percentage of -67.4% indicates that the Intel part scores less than one-third of the NVIDIA card's total. This is a massive gulf, far exceeding typical generational improvements within a single vendor's lineup.

Beyond the head-to-head, the benchmark profiles of each card tell a more complete story. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 has only that single OpenCL score of 6,554, placing it in the 38th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are all older or lower-tier mobile parts: the AMD Radeon HD 7730M (6,581, +0.6% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M (6,513, -0.6% delta), the AMD Radeon R7 M460 (6,612, +0.9% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M (6,493, -0.9% delta). The Intel part sits squarely in this cluster, trading fractions of a percent with each rival. This suggests its performance is essentially equivalent to a mid-range discrete GPU from several years ago, not a modern powerhouse.

The Quadro P2000, by contrast, shows a broader benchmark footprint. Its OpenCL score of 20,125 is its highest, but it also posts 23,566 in Geekbench Vulkan, indicating strong cross-API consistency. However, its average benchmark score across all tests is 6,049, which is dragged down by low scores in Passmark DirectX tests (34 in DX10, 47 in DX11, 28 in DX12, and 124 in DX9). This discrepancy is curious: the Vulkan and OpenCL scores are strong, yet the DirectX 10, 11, and 12 scores are minuscule. The Passmark G3D score of 6,956 and GPU Compute score of 2,933 are more reasonable, but the DirectX numbers suggest either driver limitations or a workload profile that does not favor those legacy APIs. The Quadro P2000's nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (6,077, -0.5% delta), NVIDIA RTX A400 (6,078, -0.5% delta), AMD Radeon 760M (6,019, +0.5% delta), and AMD Radeon RX 6400 (6,001, +0.8% delta). These deltas are all within 1%, meaning the Quadro P2000's average score is statistically tied with modern entry-level discrete GPUs.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 is the superior performer in raw compute. Its OpenCL score of 20,125 versus 6,554 for the Intel UHD Graphics P750 is a 3.07x advantage. For any workload that relies on OpenCL or Vulkan compute, the Quadro P2000 is the clear choice.

However, the story is not entirely one-sided. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 draws only 15 W, while the Quadro P2000 has a 75 W TDP. The Intel part is an IGP with system-shared memory, meaning it requires no additional power connectors and fits into any motherboard with a compatible CPU. The Quadro P2000, while also not requiring power connectors, is a single-slot card with a 196 mm length and 111 mm height, and it needs a PCIe 3.0 x16 slot. The Intel solution is thus far more flexible for compact or low-power systems.

For the user who needs a dedicated workstation card with 5 GB of GDDR5 memory and 140.2 GB/s of bandwidth, the Quadro P2000 is the only option here. The Intel part's memory is system-dependent, offering no dedicated VRAM. The Quadro P2000's 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs also provide multi-monitor professional connectivity, whereas the Intel part's outputs are motherboard-dependent.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 wins decisively in every compute-heavy metric. Its 3.031 TFLOPS of FP32 performance dwarfs the Intel's 665.6 GFLOPS, a 4.55x difference. The Quadro P2000 also has 1024 shading units versus 256, and 40 ROPs versus 32. Its pixel rate of 59.20 GPixel/s and texture rate of 94.72 GTexel/s exceed the Intel's 41.60 GPixel/s and 83.20 GTexel/s. The Quadro P2000's 5 GB of GDDR5 memory with 140.2 GB/s bandwidth is a categorical advantage over system-shared memory.

The Intel UHD Graphics P750 wins on power efficiency and integration. At 15 W, it uses one-fifth the power of the Quadro P2000's 75 W. It also supports FP16 at 1,331.2 GFLOPS (2:1 ratio), which is higher than the Quadro P2000's 47.36 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio). This means for workloads that can leverage FP16, the Intel part actually has a compute advantage, though the Quadro P2000's FP32 dominance matters more in most professional applications. The Intel part also has a higher transistor density implied by its 14 nm+++ process node from Intel, though the Quadro P2000 uses a 16 nm TSMC process with 4,400 million transistors on a 200 mm² die.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 20,125 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Intel UHD Graphics P750 scores 6,554. The Quadro P2000 is 67.4% faster in this test.

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

A: It is statistically tied with the AMD Radeon HD 7730M (6,581, +0.6% delta), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M (6,513, -0.6% delta), AMD Radeon R7 M460 (6,612, +0.9% delta), and NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M (6,493, -0.9% delta). All deltas are under 1%.

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

A: The Intel UHD Graphics P750 has an average score of 6,554 (its only benchmark). The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 has an average score of 6,049 across all its benchmarks, which is pulled down by low Passmark DirectX scores.

Q: Which GPU supports Vulkan, and what are the scores?

A: Both support Vulkan 1.4. The Intel part has no Vulkan benchmark listed. The Quadro P2000 scores 23,566 in Geekbench Vulkan, its highest single score.

Q: What are the memory configurations?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics P750 uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 has 5 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 160-bit bus with 140.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 has a pixel rate of 59.20 GPixel/s, exceeding the Intel UHD Graphics P750's 41.60 GPixel/s by roughly 42%.

Architecture Differences

The Intel UHD Graphics P750 is built on Intel's Generation 12.1 architecture, using the Rocket Lake chip and a 14 nm+++ process node from Intel's own foundry. It features 256 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its FP32 compute is 665.6 GFLOPS, while FP16 is 1,331.2 GFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. The part uses a Ring Bus interface and has no dedicated memory, relying entirely on system-shared memory. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The TDP is 15 W, and it is an IGP with motherboard-dependent display outputs.

The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 uses the Pascal architecture, built on the GP106 chip with TSMC's 16 nm process. It packs 4,400 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 22.0M / mm². The GPU has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. FP32 performance is 3.031 TFLOPS, while FP16 is a mere 47.36 GFLOPS at a 1:64 ratio, indicating a heavy bias toward FP32 workloads. The card has 5 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 160-bit bus with 140.2 GB/s bandwidth. Its base clock is 1076 MHz with a boost of 1480 MHz, and memory runs at 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The Quadro P2000 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface and outputs via 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. It is a single-slot card measuring 196 mm in length and 111 mm in height, with no power connectors required and a suggested 250 W PSU.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 has a base clock of 350 MHz and a boost of 1300 MHz, while the Quadro P2000 starts at 1076 MHz and boosts to 1480 MHz. The Intel part's memory is system-shared with system-dependent bandwidth, whereas the Quadro P2000 has 5 GB of GDDR5 with a 160-bit bus and 140.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Shading units differ by a factor of four: 256 on the Intel part versus 1024 on the NVIDIA card. TMUs are equal at 64, but ROPs favor the Quadro P2000 at 40 versus 32. Pixel rate is 41.60 GPixel/s for Intel and 59.20 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate is 83.20 GTexel/s for Intel and 94.72 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. FP32 compute is 665.6 GFLOPS for Intel versus 3.031 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16 is 1,331.2 GFLOPS for Intel versus 47.36 GFLOPS for NVIDIA.

Power consumption is a major differentiator: the Intel part draws 15 W, while the Quadro P2000 draws 75 W. The Intel part is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface, while the NVIDIA card is a single-slot PCIe 3.0 x16 card with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The Quadro P2000 has a 196 mm length and 111 mm height, while the Intel part's dimensions are not specified. The Quadro P2000 also has a specified transistor count of 4,400 million and a die size of 200 mm², whereas the Intel part lists no transistors or die size. Both support the same API versions: DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.