Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M

Comparative analysis of Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M 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, 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 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4

• Videocard is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 5 month(s) later
• 1122.4x more texture fill rate: 52.80 GTexel/s vs 47.04 GTexel / s
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 10 nm vs 28 nm
• 5x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 75 Watt
• Around 56% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 383 vs 245
• Around 9% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 11991 vs 10985
• Around 47% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 79.859 vs 54.294
• Around 43% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1137.615 vs 795.325
• Around 24% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.569 vs 3.692
• Around 19% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 61.688 vs 51.794
• Around 10% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 192.566 vs 174.513
• Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5609 vs 5264
• Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5609 vs 5264

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M

• 3.7x more core clock speed: 1096 MHz vs 300 MHz
• Around 7% higher boost clock speed: 1176 MHz vs 1100 MHz
• Around 67% higher pipelines: 640 vs 384
• Around 26% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3366 vs 2666

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2666 3366
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	383 245
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	11991 10985
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	79.859 54.294
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1137.615 795.325
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4.569 3.692
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	61.688 51.794
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	192.566 174.513
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5609 5264
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3708 3714
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3356 3358
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5609 5264
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3708 3714
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3356 3358

Compare specifications (specs)