Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 vs NVIDIA Quadro K4200
Comparative analysis of Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 and NVIDIA Quadro K4200 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 - 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), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- Around 28% higher boost clock speed: 1000 MHz vs 784 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 7.2x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 108 Watt
- 16x more maximum memory size: 64 GB vs 4 GB
| Launch date | 1 September 2015 vs 22 July 2014 |
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz vs 784 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 108 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB vs 4 GB |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K4200
- 2.6x more core clock speed: 771 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 18.7x more pipelines: 1344 vs 72
- Around 94% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4327 vs 2231
- Around 22% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 12186 vs 10003
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3382 vs 1671
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3382 vs 1671
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3311 vs 3175
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3311 vs 3175
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 771 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Pipelines | 1344 vs 72 |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4327 vs 2231 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 12186 vs 10003 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3382 vs 1671 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3382 vs 1671 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3311 vs 3175 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3311 vs 3175 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K4200
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| 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 Pro Graphics P580 | NVIDIA Quadro K4200 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2231 | 4327 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 509 | 509 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10003 | 12186 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1671 | 3382 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1671 | 3382 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3175 | 3311 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3175 | 3311 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 33.016 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 736.063 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.73 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 31.588 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 70.194 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6373 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6373 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 | NVIDIA Quadro K4200 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 | Kepler |
| Code name | Skylake GT4e | GK104 |
| Launch date | 1 September 2015 | 22 July 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 666 | 684 |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $854.99 | |
| Price now | $446.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 11.92 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | 784 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 771 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 72 | 1344 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 108 Watt |
| Transistor count | 189 million | 3,540 million |
| Floating-point performance | 2,107 gflops | |
| Texture fill rate | 87.81 GTexel / s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 241 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 64 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory type | DDR3L / LPDDR3 / DDR4 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
| Memory bandwidth | 172.8 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 5400 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 with others
IntelIris Pro Graphics P580 vs
AMDRadeon HD 7610M
IntelIris Pro Graphics P580 vs
AMDFirePro D500
IntelIris Pro Graphics P580 vs
NVIDIAQuadro M600M
IntelIris Pro Graphics P580 vs
AMDRadeon R7 430 OEM
IntelIris Pro Graphics P580 vs
AMDRadeon RX Vega 8 Mobile
IntelIris Pro Graphics P580 vs
IntelUHD Graphics 730
