NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) and Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 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 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 8 month(s) later
- 6.8x more core clock speed: 1354 MHz vs 200 MHz
- Around 15% higher boost clock speed: 1493 MHz vs 1300 MHz
- 5.7x more texture fill rate: 59.72 GTexel / s vs 10.4 GTexel / s
- 16x more pipelines: 640 vs 40
- 18.4x better floating-point performance: 1,911 gflops vs 104.0 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 16 nm vs 22 nm
- 3.7x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4462 vs 1191
- 3.3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 16801 vs 5081
- 3.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7239 vs 2095
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3721 vs 3285
- 3.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7239 vs 2095
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3721 vs 3285
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 1 February 2017 vs 27 May 2013 |
| Core clock speed | 1354 MHz vs 200 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1493 MHz vs 1300 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 59.72 GTexel / s vs 10.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 640 vs 40 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,911 gflops vs 104.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm vs 22 nm |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4462 vs 1191 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 16801 vs 5081 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7239 vs 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3721 vs 3285 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7239 vs 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3721 vs 3285 |
Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
- 2.5x lower typical power consumption: 30 Watt vs 75 Watt
- Around 37% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 399 vs 292
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt vs 75 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 399 vs 292 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
GPU 2: Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4462 | 1191 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 292 | 399 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 16801 | 5081 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 67.209 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 799.414 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.536 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.523 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 223.683 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7239 | 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3721 | 3285 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7239 | 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3721 | 3285 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2085 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Generation 7.5 |
| Code name | GP106B | Haswell GT3e |
| Launch date | 1 February 2017 | 27 May 2013 |
| Place in performance rating | 642 | 644 |
| Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1493 MHz | 1300 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1354 MHz | 200 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 1,911 gflops | 104.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 22 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 40 |
| Texture fill rate | 59.72 GTexel / s | 10.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 30 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4,400 million | 392 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| G-SYNC support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Laptop size | large | medium sized |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.3 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 112.1 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 7008 MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | eDRAM |
| Shared memory | 0 | 1 |
Technologies |
||
| Multi Monitor | ||
| Multi-Projection | ||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 1000
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) vs
NVIDIAQuadro NVS 210S
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 3430
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) vs
IntelIris Pro Graphics 5200
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) vs
AMDRadeon R7 260X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) vs
AMDFirePro M5100
