Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M
Comparative analysis of Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M 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, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (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), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 10 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 22 nm vs 40 nm
- 3.3x lower typical power consumption: 30 Watt vs 100 Watt
- Around 14% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 399 vs 349
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 27 May 2013 vs 28 June 2011 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm vs 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt vs 100 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 399 vs 349 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M
- 3.1x more core clock speed: 620 MHz vs 200 MHz
- 3.8x more texture fill rate: 39.7 billion / sec vs 10.4 GTexel / s
- 9.6x more pipelines: 384 vs 40
- 9.2x better floating-point performance: 952.3 gflops vs 104.0 gflops
- Around 74% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2074 vs 1191
- Around 27% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2664 vs 2095
- Around 27% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2664 vs 2095
- Around 26% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 6389 vs 5081
- Around 10% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3626 vs 3285
- Around 10% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3626 vs 3285
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 620 MHz vs 200 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 39.7 billion / sec vs 10.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 384 vs 40 |
| Floating-point performance | 952.3 gflops vs 104.0 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2074 vs 1191 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2664 vs 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2664 vs 2095 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6389 vs 5081 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3626 vs 3285 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3626 vs 3285 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1191 | 2074 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 399 | 349 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2095 | 2664 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2095 | 2664 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5081 | 6389 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3285 | 3626 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3285 | 3626 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 24.415 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 690.98 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.83 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 29.702 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 67.215 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3318 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3318 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 7.5 | Fermi 2.0 |
| Code name | Haswell GT3e | GF114 |
| Launch date | 27 May 2013 | 28 June 2011 |
| Place in performance rating | 644 | 921 |
| Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1300 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz | 620 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 104.0 gflops | 952.3 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 40 | 384 |
| Texture fill rate | 10.4 GTexel / s | 39.7 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Transistor count | 392 million | 1,950 million |
| CUDA cores | 384 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Laptop size | medium sized | large |
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | |
| SLI options | 2-way | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12 API |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
| Memory type | eDRAM | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 1 | 0 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 96.0 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
| 3D Blu-Ray | ||
| 3D Gaming | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
| Optimus | ||
| SLI | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 with others
IntelIris Pro Graphics 5200 vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 1000
IntelIris Pro Graphics 5200 vs
ATIMobility Radeon X2300
IntelIris Pro Graphics 5200 vs
ATIRadeon HD 2600 XT
IntelIris Pro Graphics 5200 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 3430
IntelIris Pro Graphics 5200 vs
AMDFirePro M5100
IntelIris Pro Graphics 5200 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
