NVIDIA Quadro M2000M vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M2000M and Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 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 NVIDIA Quadro M2000M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 2 month(s) later
• 3.4x more core clock speed: 1029 MHz vs 300 MHz
• 13.3x more pipelines: 640 vs 48
• Around 59% better floating-point performance: 1,405 gflops vs 883.2 gflops
• 2.4x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3467 vs 1461
• Around 82% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 8148 vs 4466
• Around 99% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4920 vs 2475
• 3.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 958
• Around 46% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 vs 2304
• Around 99% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4920 vs 2475
• 3.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 958
• Around 46% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 vs 2304

Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200

• Around 5% higher boost clock speed: 1150 MHz vs 1098 MHz
• Around 26% higher texture fill rate: 55.2 GTexel / s vs 43.92 GTexel / s
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• 3.7x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 55 Watt
• Around 67% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 569 vs 340

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M2000M
GPU 2: Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	3467 1461
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	340 569
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	8148 4466
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4920 2475
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 958
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3355 2304
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4920 2475
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 958
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3355 2304

Compare specifications (specs)