# Performance per core-Intel Execution Units vs Nvidia CUDA Cores vs AMD Stream Processors?



## bhvm (Apr 2, 2015)

Hello Friends,
I brought a new laptop thats HP p028TX that comes with Intel 4030u (HD4400) and Nvidia 830M (256 Shaders)

I just had a nice session of BFBC2 and COD MW2. And Here comes the surprize, I ended up using the onboard Intel 4400 and the game played well!

Yeah this is the same crappy intels which used to be the subject of mockery and puns 4 years ago.I would admit that intels have really grown up on their CPU as well as GPUs.

Now here's my question, Every GPU has some sort of "Cores".
Intel 4400 has 20
Nvidia 830m has 256
Nvidia 9800GT 112
AMD Rs 230m 320
AMD 8570m 384.

I see theres quite a difference in names and hence the confusion. In yesteryears, I would know that AMD Shaders where somewhere 4~5 Times weakers than Nvidia. I mean an Nvidia 64 or 96 Shader card would deliver the same FPS as AMD 320 shader card.Now comes intel in the game. Having the least 'Cores' Still keeping up. So how are intel's core when compared to AMD or nvidia GPU ones?

I am keen on understanding the technical and practical aspects of modern GPUs and figuring how these cores are different among architectures.


----------



## REDHOTIRON2004 (Apr 2, 2015)

Actually, I won't be able to give you the technical difference. But, from a layman point of view, I will try to tell the difference according to my experiences.
First of all, the cores and shaders work differently according to architectures that is different in both nvidia and amd. And that's where there performance difference is determined. For eg: nvidia generally have an advantage in tesstillation over amd. Also, it's a known fact that with nvidia you dont need a powerful cpu as it handles most of the work by itself(cuda cores). While amd does that differently have to use more cpu in the process.

Having said that, you might have understood till now that amd more cores over nvidia doesn't mean better card. It just the difference in architecture.

Coming on to Intel. Yes there hd4400 can easily be a substitute to a low end graphic card like ati hd5450 or an nvidia gfx 630. 

But the difference here is that,
While a discrete graphic card have got most of the resources like RAM, CORES etc within itself. It doesn't rely much on other specs of the computer like cpu speed, available ram, or ram speed etc. Intel inbuilt graphics derive its power primarily from other computer specs like dual channel rams, cpu speed and cores etc.

Due to the difference in artitecture and optimisation a direct comparison between the 3 Intel,amd, nvidia is not possible. 

Both have there own advantages and disadvantages. From gaming point of view. The hd 4400 with dual channel ram etc would perform almost equivalently like ati hd5450 or nvidia gfx 630 or even 640 in some cases.


----------



## kkn13 (Apr 3, 2015)

^^pretty much sums it all up
i wouldnt say intel performance is better than most dedicated gpus or that nvidia is better than amd
Intel HD4000 performance was rather absymal compared to my 7730m(both on the same laptop- Inspiron 7520)
as for HD4400,performance was just OK,not comparable to the nvidia card on my 7 year old Vaio(HD4400 was tested on my moms Macbook under windows 8.1 partition)
Also more demanding games dont play well on integrated gpus because of shared (v)ram with the mobo itself
about nvidia,ive actually seen better performance for most titles on my 7730m than my friends GT650M(not sure which exactly,it was either 650m or newer for sure though)
certain titles such as watch dogs play better than AMD but games such as skyrim,tribes ascend run better on AMD


----------



## bhvm (Apr 9, 2015)

Hello Dear all,
Thanks for providing a very detailed know how on the technology. I Guess its the manufacturer's first job to confuse the consumers by technical jargons, deliberate proprietor standards and weird ways to define same things.

I was looking at a simple X no of Nvidia cores=y intel cores=z AMD cores type thing.
Or I would like to see what dedicated Nvidia or AMD cards perform close to Intel 4400

Anyways, after spending a half sunday on Notebook check and comparing various benchmark and game FPS,
I made a (Very) rough rule of Thumb like-
\
Intel 20 EU= Nvidia 96 Cores= Amd 192 Cores.

*www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-4400.91979.0.html
NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GT - NotebookCheck.net Tech
AMD Radeon HD 8570M - NotebookCheck.net Tech


----------



## SaiyanGoku (Apr 9, 2015)

^9800M is very old and shouldn't be used in comparison. If you want to, use 980M or 970M instead.


----------



## bhvm (Apr 10, 2015)

SaiyanGoku said:


> ^9800M is very old and shouldn't be used in comparison. If you want to, use 980M or 970M instead.



980 or 970m are'nt easily available and comparing these beasts are totally futile against onboards like 4400  Intel or Cheap GFX card like Nvidia 630m or 820m (I see market literally flooded with 820m, Anything above costs a bomb!)


----------



## SaiyanGoku (Apr 10, 2015)

bhvm said:


> 980 or 970m are'nt easily available and comparing these beasts are totally futile against onboards like 4400  Intel or Cheap GFX card like Nvidia 630m or 820m (I see market literally flooded with 820m, Anything above costs a bomb!)


Laptops with 840M are common and not pricey. Use them instead. 980M and 970M are available easily you just have to look at the right place. Anything older than 800M series isn't justified for the comparison as OEMs don't use them now.


----------



## whitestar_999 (Apr 10, 2015)

it also depends on usage.e.g.nvidia 840m is good budget laptop option but for those looking forward to use it with madvr for their sd/hd videos(especially anime) it is disappointing because of the way nvidia cards handle madvr but for a gamer 840m is good budget option.


----------



## bhvm (Apr 20, 2015)

SaiyanGoku said:


> Laptops with 840M are common and not pricey. Use them instead. 980M and 970M are available easily you just have to look at the right place. Anything older than 800M series isn't justified for the comparison as OEMs don't use them now.





whitestar_999 said:


> it also depends on usage.e.g.nvidia 840m is good budget laptop option but for those looking forward to use it with madvr for their sd/hd videos(especially anime) it is disappointing because of the way nvidia cards handle madvr but for a gamer 840m is good budget option.



Man, I don't know where you live and from where you Buy lappys from.
However, Finding decent good graphics laptop in INDIA is particularly troublesome esp excluding metros.

You're calling 840m a 'BUDGET' and "Common" Card , however I looked high and low to find anything above an 820m. I finally had to settle for 830m HP laptop at 38.5k.

Also, ask anything from the 9xx series and you're looking 60k Plus. Check the Amazon.in for Price references.


----------



## SaiyanGoku (Apr 20, 2015)

bhvm said:


> Man, I don't know where you live and from where you Buy lappys from.
> However, Finding decent good graphics laptop in INDIA is particularly troublesome esp excluding metros.
> 
> You're calling 840m a 'BUDGET' and "Common" Card , however I looked high and low to find anything above an 820m. I finally had to settle for 830m HP laptop at 38.5k.
> ...



Lenovo Z50 is with 840M for 42-45k. Some Dell and HP models also come with 840M in the same price range. Its the people's fault they take 2/4 GB as magic numbers instead of the GPU used and settle for 820M/830M when they could've bough one with 840M. One has more chances of finding high end laptops in metros compared to tier 2/3 cities. People get duped into buying a 35k laptop with 820M for 40k in shops. Lack of information is to be blamed. And seriously, 900M series is available in India with Azom, Alienware and MSI. If you want for cheaper, you'll have to import a clevo/sager from xotic pc.


----------

