Quadro FX 1700M vs Iris Plus Graphics 655
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 654 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 20.73 | no data |
| Architecture | Generation 9.5 (2016−2020) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | Coffee Lake GT3e | G96 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 3 April 2018 (6 years ago) | 1 October 2008 (16 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 cores | 384 | 32 |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 625 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 189 million | 314 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm+++ | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 50.40 | 10.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.8064 TFLOPS | 0.0992 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 6 | 8 |
| TMUs | 48 | 16 |
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).
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Interface | Ring Bus | MXM-II |
| Width | IGP | no data |
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 type | System Shared | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
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 Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | No outputs |
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.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | N/A |
| CUDA | - | 1.1 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 3 April 2018 | 1 October 2008 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 50 Watt |
Iris Plus Graphics 655 has an age advantage of 9 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Iris Plus Graphics 655 and Quadro FX 1700M. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Iris Plus Graphics 655 is a desktop card while Quadro FX 1700M is a mobile workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
