NVS 510 vs HD Graphics 4600

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

HD Graphics 4600
2013
System Shared System Shared
1.83
+1.1%

HD Graphics 4600 outperforms NVS 510 by 1% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary Details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in performance ranking872876
Place by popularity39not in top-100
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation0.080.14
ArchitectureGen. 7.5 Haswell (2012−2013)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameHaswell GT2GK107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 June 2013 (10 years ago)23 October 2012 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$449
Current price$464 $61 (0.1x MSRP)

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

NVS 510 has 75% better value for money than HD Graphics 4600.

Detailed Specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores20192
Core clock speed200 MHz797 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHzno data
Number of transistors392 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology22 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate27.0012.75
Floating-point performance50 gflops306.0 gflops

Form Factor & Compatibility

Information on HD Graphics 4600 and NVS 510 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data160 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

VRAM Capacity and Type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeSystem SharedDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared2 GB
Memory bus width64/128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1782 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data28.51 GB/s
Shared memory+no data

Connectivity and Outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs4x mini-DisplayPort

Supported GPU Technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Sync+no data

API Compatibility

List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.34.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.801.1.126
CUDAno data3.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

HD Graphics 4600 1.83
+1.1%
NVS 510 1.81

HD Graphics 4600 outperforms NVS 510 by 1% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

HD Graphics 4600 710
+1.3%
NVS 510 701

HD Graphics 4600 outperforms NVS 510 by 1% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p14
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Full HD11
+10%
10−12
−10%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Hitman 3 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Hitman 3 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

This is how HD Graphics 4600 and NVS 510 compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 4600 is 16.7% faster than NVS 510 in 900p
  • HD Graphics 4600 is 10% faster than NVS 510 in 1080p

Pros & Cons Summary


Performance score 1.83 1.81
Recency 1 June 2013 23 October 2012
Maximum RAM amount System Shared 2 GB
Chip lithography 22 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 35 Watt

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between HD Graphics 4600 and NVS 510.

Be aware that HD Graphics 4600 is a notebook card while NVS 510 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for Your Favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


Intel HD Graphics 4600
HD Graphics 4600
NVIDIA NVS 510
NVS 510

Comparisons with Similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community Ratings

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.2 2050 votes

Rate HD Graphics 4600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 48 votes

Rate NVS 510 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & Сomments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.