GeForce GT 635 OEM vs Iris Plus Graphics 655

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking655not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency20.82no data
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code nameCoffee Lake GT3eGK208
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date3 April 2018 (6 years ago)1 October 2013 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores384384
Core clock speed300 MHz967 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million915 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm+++28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate50.4030.94
Floating-point processing power0.8064 TFLOPS0.7427 TFLOPS
ROPs68
TMUs4832

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfaceRing BusPCIe 3.0 x8
Lengthno data145 mm
WidthIGP1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeSystem SharedDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared900 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data14.4 GB/s
Shared memory+no data

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.01.2
Vulkan1.31.1.126
CUDA-3.5

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 April 2018 1 October 2013
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 35 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics 655 has an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Iris Plus Graphics 655 and GeForce GT 635 OEM. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655
Iris Plus Graphics 655
NVIDIA GeForce GT 635 OEM
GeForce GT 635 OEM

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 328 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 655 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 70 votes

Rate GeForce GT 635 OEM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.