Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs Quadro K1100M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K1100M with Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, including specs and performance data.

K1100M
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 45 Watt
2.83

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs outperforms K1100M by a whopping 167% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking794526
Place by popularitynot in top-10048
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.05no data
Power efficiency4.3918.85
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGK107Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109.94 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 cores38480
Core clock speed706 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1350 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate22.59no data
Floating-point processing power0.5422 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no 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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed700 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth44.8 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
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data
Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212_1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.5no 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.

K1100M 2.83
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 7.57
+167%

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.

K1100M 1827
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 5332
+192%

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.

K1100M 8992
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 21729
+142%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

K1100M 1341
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 4010
+199%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

K1100M 9228
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 21931
+138%

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

K1100M 18
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 44
+150%

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:

Full HD17
−11.8%
19
+11.8%
1440p3−4
−233%
10
+233%
4K5−6
−180%
14
+180%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.47no data
1440p36.65no data
4K21.99no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−180%
14
+180%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−111%
18−20
+111%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−1800%
19
+1800%
Battlefield 5 4−5
−450%
21−24
+450%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−114%
14−16
+114%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−160%
13
+160%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−240%
16−18
+240%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−163%
21−24
+163%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−227%
45−50
+227%
Hitman 3 8−9
−100%
16
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−95.5%
40−45
+95.5%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−1167%
38
+1167%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−186%
20−22
+186%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−108%
24−27
+108%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−63.2%
62
+63.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−111%
18−20
+111%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−1500%
16
+1500%
Battlefield 5 4−5
−450%
21−24
+450%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−114%
14−16
+114%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−100%
10
+100%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−240%
16−18
+240%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−163%
21−24
+163%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−227%
45−50
+227%
Hitman 3 8−9
−87.5%
15
+87.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−95.5%
40−45
+95.5%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−800%
27
+800%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−186%
20−22
+186%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−100%
24
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
+4.5%
21−24
−4.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−28.9%
49
+28.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−111%
18−20
+111%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−114%
14−16
+114%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−60%
8
+60%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−240%
16−18
+240%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−227%
45−50
+227%
Hitman 3 8−9
−50%
12
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+37.5%
16
−37.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−66.7%
20
+66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
−175%
11
+175%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−44.7%
55−60
+44.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−186%
20−22
+186%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−175%
10−12
+175%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Hitman 3 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−400%
10
+400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
−176%
45−50
+176%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−117%
12−14
+117%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 8−9
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16
+0%
16
+0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how K1100M and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 12% faster in 1080p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 233% faster in 1440p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 180% faster in 4K

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

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the K1100M is 38% faster.
  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 1800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • K1100M is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is ahead in 59 tests (83%)
  • there's a draw in 10 tests (14%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.83 7.57
Recency 23 July 2013 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 28 Watt

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs has a 167.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 60.7% lower power consumption.

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K1100M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K1100M is a mobile workstation card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 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 K1100M
Quadro K1100M
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs

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.


3.1 220 votes

Rate Quadro K1100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 905 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 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.