HD Graphics 530 vs Quadro K3000M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K3000M with HD Graphics 530, including specs and performance data.

K3000M
2012
2 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
4.25
+63.5%

K3000M outperforms HD Graphics 530 by an impressive 63% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking678818
Place by popularitynot in top-10097
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.52no data
Power efficiency3.9512.08
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)
GPU code nameGK104Skylake GT2
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date1 June 2012 (12 years ago)1 September 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$155 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores576192
Core clock speed654 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data950 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm+
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate31.3922.80
Floating-point processing power0.7534 TFLOPS0.3648 TFLOPS
ROPs323
TMUs4824

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)Ring Bus

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 typeGDDR5DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4
Maximum RAM amount2 GB64 GB
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed700 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth89.6 GB/sno data
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 outputsPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan++
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark 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.

K3000M 4.25
+63.5%
HD Graphics 530 2.60

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

K3000M 1640
+63.8%
HD Graphics 530 1001

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

K3000M 2427
+78.2%
HD Graphics 530 1362

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

K3000M 11902
+74.2%
HD Graphics 530 6831

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:

900p33
+83.3%
18−21
−83.3%
Full HD35
+169%
13
−169%
4K10−12
+42.9%
7
−42.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.43no data
4K15.50no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Battlefield 5 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Hitman 3 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+23.1%
13
−23.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+15.8%
35−40
−15.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Battlefield 5 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Hitman 3 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+23.1%
13
−23.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+15.8%
35−40
−15.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Hitman 3 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+433%
3
−433%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+15.8%
35−40
−15.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Hitman 3 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 24−27
+73.3%
14−16
−73.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 0−1 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2 0−1
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

This is how K3000M and HD Graphics 530 compete in popular games:

  • K3000M is 83% faster in 900p
  • K3000M is 169% faster in 1080p
  • K3000M is 43% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the K3000M is 433% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, K3000M surpassed HD Graphics 530 in all 57 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.25 2.60
Recency 1 June 2012 1 September 2015
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 64 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 15 Watt

K3000M has a 63.5% higher aggregate performance score.

HD Graphics 530, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K3000M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 530 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K3000M is a mobile workstation card while HD Graphics 530 is a mobile 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.


NVIDIA Quadro K3000M
Quadro K3000M
Intel HD Graphics 530
HD Graphics 530

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.


3.4 69 votes

Rate Quadro K3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 1478 votes

Rate HD Graphics 530 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.