Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 vs NVIDIA Quadro M2000

Comparative analysis of Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 and NVIDIA Quadro M2000 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).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4

• Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 4 month(s) later
• 932.2x more texture fill rate: 52.80 GTexel/s vs 56.64 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 45% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 79.859 vs 55.048
• Around 78% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1138.276 vs 639.056
• Around 24% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.596 vs 3.697
• Around 72% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 61.742 vs 35.796
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5609 vs 5523
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3708 vs 3684
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3356 vs 3325
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5609 vs 5523
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3708 vs 3684
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3356 vs 3325

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M2000

• 2.7x more core clock speed: 796 MHz vs 300 MHz
• Around 6% higher boost clock speed: 1163 MHz vs 1100 MHz
• 2x more pipelines: 768 vs 384
• Around 49% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3999 vs 2687
• Around 60% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 568 vs 354
• Around 15% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 14036 vs 12204
• Around 17% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 225.868 vs 193.829

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M2000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2687 3999
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	354 568
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	12204 14036
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	79.859 55.048
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1138.276 639.056
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4.596 3.697
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	61.742 35.796
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	193.829 225.868
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5609 5523
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3708 3684
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3356 3325
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5609 5523
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3708 3684
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3356 3325

Compare specifications (specs)