Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) vs NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
Comparative analysis of Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) 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: 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), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 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 G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 9 month(s) later
- Around 9% higher boost clock speed: 1100 MHz vs 1013 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 10 nm vs 28 nm
- 4x lower typical power consumption: 25 Watt vs 100 Watt
- Around 35% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3714 vs 2749
- Around 35% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3714 vs 2749
- Around 8% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 vs 3093
- Around 8% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 vs 3093
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 28 May 2019 vs 18 August 2015 |
Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz vs 1013 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 10 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 25 Watt vs 100 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 vs 2749 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 vs 2749 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 vs 3093 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 vs 3093 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
- 3.3x more core clock speed: 975 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 20x more pipelines: 1,280 vs 64
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7602 vs 3751
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7602 vs 3751
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 975 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Pipelines | 1,280 vs 64 |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7602 vs 3751 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7602 vs 3751 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
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 Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) | NVIDIA Quadro M4000M |
---|---|---|
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3751 | 7602 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3751 | 7602 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 | 2749 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 | 2749 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 3093 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 3093 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6226 | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 423 | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 18998 | |
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 G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) | NVIDIA Quadro M4000M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Intel Gen. 11 (Ice Lake) | Maxwell 2.0 |
Code name | Ice Lake G7 Gen. 11 | GM204 |
Launch date | 28 May 2019 | 18 August 2015 |
Place in performance rating | 669 | 547 |
Type | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | 1013 MHz |
Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 975 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 10 nm | 28 nm |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 2.25 TFLOPS | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 1.12 TFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 64 | 1,280 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 25 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 | ||
HDMI | ||
Display Connectors | No outputs | |
Display Port | 1.2 | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.1 | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | |
Shader Model | 5.0 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Memory type | 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 |
||
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 |