Intel Iris Graphics 550 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
Comparative analysis of Intel Iris Graphics 550 and NVIDIA Quadro K2000D videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Graphics 550
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 3.4x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 51 Watt
- Around 85% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 7182 vs 3883
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2675 vs 2646
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2675 vs 2646
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 1 September 2015 vs 1 March 2013 |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 51 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 7182 vs 3883 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2675 vs 2646 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2675 vs 2646 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
- 3.2x more core clock speed: 954 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 8x more pipelines: 384 vs 48
- Around 10% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1577 vs 1432
- Around 34% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 410 vs 305
- 2.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3493 vs 1290
- 2.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3493 vs 1290
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3339 vs 3157
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3339 vs 3157
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 954 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Pipelines | 384 vs 48 |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1577 vs 1432 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 410 vs 305 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3493 vs 1290 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3493 vs 1290 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3339 vs 3157 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3339 vs 3157 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel Iris Graphics 550
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | Intel Iris Graphics 550 | NVIDIA Quadro K2000D |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1432 | 1577 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 305 | 410 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 7182 | 3883 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2675 | 2646 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2675 | 2646 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1290 | 3493 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1290 | 3493 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3157 | 3339 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3157 | 3339 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 14.283 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 386.006 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.018 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.605 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 31.155 |
Compare specifications (specs)
Intel Iris Graphics 550 | NVIDIA Quadro K2000D | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Generation 9.0 | Kepler |
Code name | Skylake GT3e | GK107 |
Launch date | 1 September 2015 | 1 March 2013 |
Place in performance rating | 953 | 965 |
Type | Laptop | Workstation |
Launch price (MSRP) | $599 | |
Price now | $464 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 4.14 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 954 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 48 | 384 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 51 Watt |
Transistor count | 189 million | 1,270 million |
Floating-point performance | 732.7 gflops | |
Texture fill rate | 30.53 GTexel / s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Length | 202 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Memory type | eDRAM | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 1 | |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 64 GB / s | |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | |
Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
Quick Sync |