UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) vs Quadro K1000M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K1000M with UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H), including specs and performance data.

K1000M
2012
2 GB DDR3, 45 Watt
2.02

UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) outperforms K1000M by a moderate 13% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking882849
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.37no data
Power efficiency3.10no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Gen. 12 (2021−2023)
GPU code nameGK107Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date1 June 2012 (12 years ago)30 March 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$119.90 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores19216
Core clock speed850 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1450 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Wattno data
Texture fill rate13.60no data
Floating-point processing power0.3264 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs16no data

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)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 typeDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed900 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12_1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

K1000M 2.02
UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) 2.29
+13.4%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

K1000M 1102
UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) 1654
+50.1%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

K1000M 5165
UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) 7190
+39.2%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p9
−11.1%
10−12
+11.1%
Full HD16
+33.3%
12
−33.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.49no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−5.6%
18−20
+5.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−2.9%
35−40
+2.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−5.6%
18−20
+5.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−10%
11
+10%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−2.9%
35−40
+2.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−5.6%
18−20
+5.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−40%
14
+40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+140%
5
−140%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−2.9%
35−40
+2.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 1−2
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1

This is how K1000M and UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 11% faster in 900p
  • K1000M is 33% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the K1000M is 140% faster.
  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • K1000M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is ahead in 34 tests (62%)
  • there's a draw in 20 tests (36%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.02 2.29
Recency 1 June 2012 30 March 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm

UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) has a 13.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K1000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K1000M is a mobile workstation card while UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) 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.

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.


NVIDIA Quadro K1000M
Quadro K1000M
Intel UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H)

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.


3.7 77 votes

Rate Quadro K1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.5 360 votes

Rate UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) 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.