Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645 vs NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
Comparative analysis of Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645 and NVIDIA Quadro M4000M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, API support, Memory, Technologies, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: Geekbench - OpenCL, PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 10 month(s) later
- Around 14% higher boost clock speed: 1150 MHz vs 1013 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 6.7x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 100 Watt
| Launch date | 10 July 2019 vs 18 August 2015 |
| Boost clock speed | 1150 MHz vs 1013 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 100 Watt |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
- 3.3x more core clock speed: 975 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 26.7x more pipelines: 1,280 vs 48
- 3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 19089 vs 6391
- Around 8% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 419 vs 389
- 3.6x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6190 vs 1727
- Around 54% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2749 vs 1780
- Around 54% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2749 vs 1780
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3093 vs 2992
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3093 vs 2992
- 2.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7602 vs 2792
- 2.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7602 vs 2792
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 975 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Pipelines | 1,280 vs 48 |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 19089 vs 6391 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 419 vs 389 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6190 vs 1727 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2749 vs 1780 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2749 vs 1780 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3093 vs 2992 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3093 vs 2992 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7602 vs 2792 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7602 vs 2792 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645 | NVIDIA Quadro M4000M |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6391 | 19089 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 389 | 419 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1727 | 6190 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1780 | 2749 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1780 | 2749 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2992 | 3093 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2992 | 3093 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2792 | 7602 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2792 | 7602 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 81.104 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1235.338 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.157 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 68.443 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 251.464 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645 | NVIDIA Quadro M4000M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Intel Gen. 9.5 (Coffee Lake) | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Code name | Kaby Lake GT3e | GM204 |
| Launch date | 10 July 2019 | 18 August 2015 |
| Place in performance rating | 813 | 552 |
| Type | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1150 MHz | 1013 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 975 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 48 | 1,280 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Floating-point performance | 2,496 gflops | |
| Texture fill rate | 78 GTexel / s | |
| Transistor count | 5,200 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| DisplayPort support | ||
| eDP 1.2 signal support | Yes | |
| HDMI | ||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | |
| Display Port | 1.2 | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Memory type | DDR3/DDR4 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | Yes | 0 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 160 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| H265/HEVC Decode | ||
| Quick Sync | ||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
| Laptop size | large | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645 with others
IntelIris Plus Graphics 645 vs
AMDRadeon E9260 PCIe
IntelIris Plus Graphics 645 vs
AMDRadeon PRO WX 2100
IntelIris Plus Graphics 645 vs
AMDRadeon RX Vega 11
IntelIris Plus Graphics 645 vs
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200
IntelIris Plus Graphics 645 vs
AMDRadeon Vega 9
IntelIris Plus Graphics 645 vs
AMDRadeon RX 640
