HD Graphics 615 vs Quadro RTX 4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 4000 with HD Graphics 615, including specs and performance data.

RTX 4000
2018
8 GB GDDR6, 160 Watt
39.58
+2005%

RTX 4000 outperforms HD Graphics 615 by a whopping 2005% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking115923
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation39.40no data
Power efficiency16.9625.78
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameTU104Kaby Lake GT2
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date13 November 2018 (6 years ago)30 August 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$899 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores2304192
Core clock speed1005 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1545 MHz850 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm14 nm++
Power consumption (TDP)160 Watt5 Watt
Texture fill rate222.520.40
Floating-point processing power7.119 TFLOPS0.3264 TFLOPS
ROPs643
TMUs14424
Tensor Cores288no data
Ray Tracing Cores36no data

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 x16Ring Bus
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno data

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 typeGDDR6DDR3L/LPDDR3
Maximum RAM amount8 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1625 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth416.0 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 Connectors3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-CPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA7.5-
DLSS+-

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.

RTX 4000 39.58
+2005%
HD Graphics 615 1.88

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.

RTX 4000 15212
+2010%
HD Graphics 615 721

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 HD350−400
+1959%
17
−1959%
1440p700−750
+1959%
34
−1959%
4K120−130
+1900%
6
−1900%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.57no data
1440p1.28no data
4K7.49no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 25
+0%
25
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 22
+0%
22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 16
+0%
16
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3
+0%
3
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 14
+0%
14
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how RTX 4000 and HD Graphics 615 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4000 is 1959% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4000 is 1959% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 4000 is 1900% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 56 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 39.58 1.88
Recency 13 November 2018 30 August 2016
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 160 Watt 5 Watt

RTX 4000 has a 2005.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

HD Graphics 615, on the other hand, has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 3100% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 615 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 is a workstation card while HD Graphics 615 is a notebook one.

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 RTX 4000
Quadro RTX 4000
Intel HD Graphics 615
HD Graphics 615

Other comparisons

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.


3.5 497 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 82 votes

Rate HD Graphics 615 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro RTX 4000 or HD Graphics 615, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.