CMP 30HX vs UHD Graphics 600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics 600 with CMP 30HX, including specs and performance data.

UHD Graphics 600
2017
DDR4 / LPDDR4, 5 Watt
0.87

CMP 30HX outperforms UHD Graphics 600 by a whopping 2323% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking1134257
Place by popularity28not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data10.89
ArchitectureGen. 9 Gemini Lake (2017)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGemini LakeTU116
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date11 December 2017 (6 years ago)25 February 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores121408
Core clock speed300 MHzno data
Boost clock speed700 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors189 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)5 Watt125 Watt
Texture fill rate9.000157.1
Floating-point performance0.144 gflops5.027 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x1PCIe 3.0 x4
Lengthno data229 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 8-pin

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 typeDDR4 / LPDDR4GDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared6 GB
Memory bus width64/128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speedno data14 GB/s
Memory bandwidthno data336.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-

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 outputsNo outputs

Supported 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 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan+1.2
CUDA-7.5

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.

UHD Graphics 600 0.87
CMP 30HX 21.08
+2323%

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.

UHD Graphics 600 334
CMP 30HX 8135
+2336%

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:

Full HD10
−2300%
240−250
+2300%
1440p1
−2300%
24−27
+2300%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−2233%
70−75
+2233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−2300%
120−130
+2300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2233%
70−75
+2233%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−2233%
70−75
+2233%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−2150%
45−50
+2150%
Hitman 3 5−6
−2300%
120−130
+2300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 13
−2208%
300−310
+2208%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−2300%
24−27
+2300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−2186%
160−170
+2186%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−2319%
750−800
+2319%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−2300%
120−130
+2300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2233%
70−75
+2233%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−2233%
70−75
+2233%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−2150%
45−50
+2150%
Hitman 3 5−6
−2300%
120−130
+2300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 11
−2264%
260−270
+2264%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−2300%
24−27
+2300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6
−2233%
140−150
+2233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
−2208%
300−310
+2208%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−2319%
750−800
+2319%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−2300%
120−130
+2300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2233%
70−75
+2233%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−2233%
70−75
+2233%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
−2300%
120−130
+2300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−2317%
290−300
+2317%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4
−2275%
95−100
+2275%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−2300%
240−250
+2300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−2319%
750−800
+2319%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−2300%
24−27
+2300%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2300%
24−27
+2300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2300%
24−27
+2300%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−2300%
24−27
+2300%
Hitman 3 7−8
−2186%
160−170
+2186%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−2275%
95−100
+2275%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
−2233%
70−75
+2233%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−2233%
70−75
+2233%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−2300%
24−27
+2300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−2150%
45−50
+2150%

This is how UHD Graphics 600 and CMP 30HX compete in popular games:

  • CMP 30HX is 2300% faster in 1080p
  • CMP 30HX is 2300% faster in 1440p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.87 21.08
Recency 11 December 2017 25 February 2021
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 5 Watt 125 Watt

UHD Graphics 600 has 2400% lower power consumption.

CMP 30HX, on the other hand, has a 2323% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The CMP 30HX is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics 600 in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics 600 is a notebook card while CMP 30HX is a desktop 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 UHD Graphics 600
UHD Graphics 600
NVIDIA CMP 30HX
CMP 30HX

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 ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3 3397 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 25 votes

Rate CMP 30HX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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