Quadro CX vs Intel HD Graphics 620
Quadro CX
Popular choices:
Intel HD Graphics 620
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The Quadro CX is positioned at rank #383 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro CX
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Intel HD Graphics 620 is significantly newer (2016 vs 2008). The Intel HD Graphics 620 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro CX lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro CX is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (4 GB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Intel HD Graphics 620.
| Insight | Quadro CX | Intel HD Graphics 620 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100+%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro CX remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Quadro CX and Intel HD Graphics 620
Quadro CX
The Quadro CX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 602 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 947 points. Launch price was $1,999.
Intel HD Graphics 620
The Intel HD Graphics 620 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in August 30 2016. It features the Generation 9.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 300 MHz to 1000 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 14 nm++ process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 919 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro CX scores 947 and the Intel HD Graphics 620 reaches 919 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro CX is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Intel HD Graphics 620 uses Generation 9.5, both on 55 nm vs 14 nm++. Shader units: 192 (Quadro CX) vs 192 (Intel HD Graphics 620). Raw compute: 0.4623 TFLOPS (Quadro CX) vs 0.384 TFLOPS (Intel HD Graphics 620).
| Feature | Quadro CX | Intel HD Graphics 620 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 947+3% | 919 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Generation 9.5 |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 14 nm++ |
| Shading Units | 192 | 192 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.4623 TFLOPS+20% | 0.384 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 24+700% | 3 |
| TMUs | 64+167% | 24 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro CX | Intel HD Graphics 620 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro CX comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Intel HD Graphics 620 has 0 MB. The Quadro CX offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs System.
| Feature | Quadro CX | Intel HD Graphics 620 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | Shared System RAM |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | Shared |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | System |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.1 (10_0) (Quadro CX) vs 12 (12_1) (Intel HD Graphics 620). Vulkan: N/A vs 1.2. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 3.
| Feature | Quadro CX | Intel HD Graphics 620 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 (12_1)+8% |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6+39% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 3+50% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (Quadro CX) vs Quick Sync Video (Intel HD Graphics 620). Decoder: PureVideo HD vs Quick Sync Video. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro CX) vs H.265/HEVC,H.264,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1,JPEG (Intel HD Graphics 620).
| Feature | Quadro CX | Intel HD Graphics 620 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | Quick Sync Video |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD | Quick Sync Video |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | H.265/HEVC,H.264,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1,JPEG |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro CX draws 150W versus the Intel HD Graphics 620's 15W — a 163.6% difference. The Intel HD Graphics 620 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro CX) vs 1W (Intel HD Graphics 620). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Integrated. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 90°C.
| Feature | Quadro CX | Intel HD Graphics 620 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W | 15W-90% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 1W-100% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Integrated |
| Length | 267mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 80-11% | 90°C |
| Perf/Watt | 6.3 | 61.3+873% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro CX launched at $1999 MSRP and currently averages $500, while the Intel HD Graphics 620 launched at $0 and now averages $0. The Intel HD Graphics 620 costs 100+% less ($500 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 1.9 (Quadro CX) vs Infinity (Intel HD Graphics 620) — the Intel HD Graphics 620 offers Infinity% better value. The Intel HD Graphics 620 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2008).
| Feature | Quadro CX | Intel HD Graphics 620 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1999 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $500 | $0-100% |
| Performance per Dollar | 1.9 | Infinity |
| Codename | GT200B | Kaby Lake GT2 |
| Release | November 11 2008 | August 30 2016 |
| Ranking | #901 | #906 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro CX and Intel HD Graphics 620
