Intel UHD Graphics P750 vs NVIDIA RTX A400 Comparison

Intel UHD Graphics P750 is an integrated graphics solution built into Rocket Lake processors, while the NVIDIA RTX A400 is a discrete workstation card based on the Ampere architecture. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy between the two, with the RTX A400 delivering dramatically higher compute throughput, though the P750 holds its own in specific legacy workloads and offers unique integration advantages.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are lopsided. The NVIDIA RTX A400 scores 22,844 points, while the Intel UHD Graphics P750 scores 6,554 points. That translates to a 71.3% deficit for the Intel part, meaning the RTX A400 is roughly 3.5 times faster in this compute-oriented test. This is not a marginal gap; it is a generational chasm in raw parallel processing capability.

Beyond that single head-to-head result, the RTX A400 provides additional benchmark data that paints a fuller picture. Its Geekbench Vulkan score is 22,237, nearly identical to its OpenCL result, indicating consistent performance across different compute APIs. The A400 also posts a Passmark G3D score of 5,983 and a Passmark G2D score of 899, with direct compute performance measured at 2,557 in Passmark GPU Compute. Legacy DirectX tests show scores of 87 for DirectX 9, 37 for DirectX 11, 32 for DirectX 10, and 27 for DirectX 12. These numbers suggest the A400 is optimized for modern workloads rather than older API paths.

The Intel P750 has only the single Geekbench OpenCL score of 6,554 in its benchmark list. Its performance percentile across all GPUs is 38, while the RTX A400 sits at percentile 35. Interestingly, despite the A400’s overwhelming victory in the head-to-head test, its average benchmark score of 6,078 is actually lower than the P750’s average of 6,554. This is because the A400’s Passmark scores drag down its average, while the P750 only has the one strong OpenCL result. The lesson here is that average scores can mislead; the specific benchmark matters more than the aggregate.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from completely different design philosophies. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 is built on a 14 nm+++ process at Intel’s foundry, using the Generation 12.1 architecture derived from Rocket Lake. It is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a Ring Bus interface, meaning it shares system memory and has no dedicated VRAM. Its memory configuration is entirely "System Shared," with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." The P750 packs 256 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, running at a base clock of 350 MHz and a boost clock of 1300 MHz. This yields a pixel rate of 41.60 GPixel/s, a texture rate of 83.20 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance of 665.6 GFLOPS. FP16 is rated at 1,331.2 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The chip has no dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores, and its TDP is just 15 W.

The NVIDIA RTX A400 is a discrete card built on Samsung’s 8 nm process, using the GA107 chip with the Ampere architecture. It has 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. The A400 features 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, along with 6 dedicated ray tracing cores and 24 tensor cores. Its base clock is 1417 MHz with a boost clock of 1762 MHz, and it comes with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. Memory runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective speed. FP32 performance is 2.706 TFLOPS, and FP16 matches at 2.706 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. Pixel rate is 28.19 GPixel/s, texture rate is 42.29 GTexel/s, and TDP is 50 W.

The architectural differences are stark. The A400 has three times the shading units of the P750, but the Intel part has more TMUs and ROPs relative to its shader count. The A400’s FP32 output of 2.706 TFLOPS is over four times the P750’s 665.6 GFLOPS. The P750 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the A400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes hardware ray tracing and mesh shaders. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The A400’s memory system is vastly superior, with dedicated GDDR6 versus the P750’s shared system memory.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A400 wins decisively in compute-heavy scenarios. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 22,844 dwarfs the P750’s 6,554, making it the clear choice for any workload that stresses parallel floating-point operations, such as GPU-accelerated rendering, scientific simulation, or machine learning inference. The A400 also has 24 tensor cores, which the P750 lacks entirely, giving it a hardware advantage for AI-related tasks. Its 6 ray tracing cores mean it can handle real-time ray-traced workloads, something the integrated Intel part cannot do at all.

The RTX A400 also wins on connectivity and form factor. It is a single-slot card with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the P750’s display outputs are "Motherboard Dependent," meaning they vary by the host motherboard. The A400 uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, whereas the P750 relies on a Ring Bus connection. The A400’s 50 W TDP is higher than the P750’s 15 W, but it still requires no external power connectors and has a suggested PSU of 250 W, making it feasible for compact workstations.

The Intel P750 does have one notable advantage: its pixel rate. At 41.60 GPixel/s, the P750 exceeds the A400’s 28.19 GPixel/s. This suggests the Intel part may be better suited for fill-rate-limited tasks, such as basic 2D compositing or certain legacy game engines that are pixel-bound rather than shader-bound. The P750 also has a higher texture rate of 83.20 GTexel/s versus the A400’s 42.29 GTexel/s, which could favor it in texture-heavy scenarios that do not rely on modern shader features. However, these theoretical advantages must be weighed against the A400’s massive compute lead.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for compute performance: the NVIDIA RTX A400 is the superior GPU by a wide margin. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 22,844 versus the Intel P750’s 6,554 represents a 71.3% lead, and its FP32 throughput of 2.706 TFLOPS is more than four times the Intel part’s 665.6 GFLOPS. Anyone who needs GPU compute for professional applications should choose the RTX A400 without hesitation. The A400’s dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 memory, 24 tensor cores, and 6 ray tracing cores make it a functional workstation card, while the P750 is fundamentally limited by sharing system memory and lacking dedicated acceleration hardware.

The Intel P750 is only viable for users who already own a Rocket Lake processor and need a basic display output with integrated graphics. It draws just 15 W, requires no additional hardware, and its pixel and texture rates are actually higher than the A400’s. For simple 2D workloads or legacy applications that are fill-rate bound, the P750 could theoretically keep pace or even outperform the A400 in specific scenarios. However, its single benchmark result and lack of modern features severely limit its usefulness. The A400 is the better purchase for any serious workload, while the P750 is a fallback option for systems where a discrete GPU is not an option.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA RTX A400 than the Intel UHD Graphics P750 in OpenCL?

A: The RTX A400 scores 22,844 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the P750 scores 6,554. That gives the A400 a 71.3% advantage, making it roughly 3.5 times faster in this test.

Q: Does the Intel P750 support ray tracing or tensor cores?

A: No. The P750 has no dedicated ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The RTX A400, in contrast, includes 6 ray tracing cores and 24 tensor cores.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each GPU?

A: The Intel P750 uses system shared memory with a "System Dependent" bandwidth. The RTX A400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Intel P750 has a pixel rate of 41.60 GPixel/s, which is higher than the RTX A400’s 28.19 GPixel/s. The P750 also has a higher texture rate at 83.20 GTexel/s versus 42.29 GTexel/s.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two cards?

A: The Intel P750 has a TDP of 15 W, while the NVIDIA RTX A400 has a TDP of 50 W. The A400 requires no external power connectors and has a suggested PSU rating of 250 W.

Q: Which GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Only the RTX A400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Intel P750 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel UHD Graphics P750 | NVIDIA RTX A400 |

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

| Architecture | Generation 12.1 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 14 nm+++ | 8 nm |

| Transistors | N/A | 8,700 million |

| Die Size | N/A | 200 mm² |

| Base Clock | 350 MHz | 1417 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1300 MHz | 1762 MHz |

| Shading Units | 256 | 768 |

| TMUs | 64 | 24 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| RT Cores | N/A | 6 |

| Tensor Cores | N/A | 24 |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | System Shared | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 96.00 GB/s |

| FP32 Performance | 665.6 GFLOPS | 2.706 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 1,331.2 GFLOPS (2:1) | 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| Pixel Rate | 41.60 GPixel/s | 28.19 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 83.20 GTexel/s | 42.29 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 15 W | 50 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | N/A | None |

| Suggested PSU | N/A | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

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

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |