Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs vs Quadro K2200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GRID M3-3020 GRID M10-8Q GRID M40 NVS 810 Quadro K620 Quadro K1200 Quadro K2200 Tesla M10
VS
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G4 Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs UHD Graphics Xe G1 UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K2200 with Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs, including specs and performance data.

Quadro K2200
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 68 Watt
9.19
+0.9%

K2200 outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Quadro K2200 Quadro K2200
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking481484
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.43no data
Power efficiency9.4122.65
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGM107Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date22 July 2014 (10 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$395.75 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores64096
Core clock speed1046 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1124 MHz1350 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)68 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate44.96no data
Floating-point processing power1.439 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs40no 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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length202 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1253 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth80.19 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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortno data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK 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+-
CUDA5.0-

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 HD24−27
−8.3%
26
+8.3%
1440p16−18
+0%
16
+0%
4K10−12
−10%
11
+10%

Cost per frame, $

1080p16.49no data
1440p24.73no data
4K39.58no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 15
+0%
15
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20
+0%
20
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 13
+0%
13
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+0%
14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 38
+0%
38
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 22
+0%
22
+0%
Metro Exodus 29
+0%
29
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 17
+0%
17
+0%
Valorant 26
+0%
26
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12
+0%
12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+0%
11
+0%
Dota 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Far Cry 5 31
+0%
31
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 17
+0%
17
+0%
Metro Exodus 19
+0%
19
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8
+0%
8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
World of Tanks 96
+0%
96
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Dota 2 47
+0%
47
+0%
Far Cry 5 34
+0%
34
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24
+0%
24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 22
+0%
22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Valorant 23
+0%
23
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 7
+0%
7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 7
+0%
7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
World of Tanks 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
+0%
3
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 19
+0%
19
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 8
+0%
8
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 8
+0%
8
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
+0%
8
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 20
+0%
20
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 11
+0%
11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

This is how Quadro K2200 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs compete in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 8% faster in 1080p
  • A tie in 1440p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 10% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 9.19 9.11
Recency 22 July 2014 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 68 Watt 28 Watt

Quadro K2200 has a 0.9% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 142.9% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro K2200 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs.

Be aware that Quadro K2200 is a workstation card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is a notebook one.

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 K2200
Quadro K2200
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

Quadro K2200 Quadro K2200
vs
GRID M6-8Q GRID M6 8Q
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
vs
HD 7970M Radeon HD 7970M
Quadro K2200 Quadro K2200
vs
T400 T400
Quadro K1200 Quadro K1200
vs
Quadro 1000M 1000M
Quadro K1200 Quadro K1200
vs
NVS 5100M 5100M
Quadro K1200 Quadro K1200
vs
ATI HD 3650 3650
Quadro K2200 Quadro K2200
vs
GTX 1660 Max-Q 1660 Max-Q
Quadro K2200 Quadro K2200
vs
GTX 1650 Mobile Refresh 1650 Mobile Refresh
Quadro K4200 Quadro K4200
vs
FX 3500 3500
Quadro K4200 Quadro K4200
vs
GeForce MX350 MX350
Quadro K4200 Quadro K4200
vs
Arc Pro A50 A50
Quadro K5200 Quadro K5200
vs
Quadro 1000M 1000M
Quadro K620 Quadro K620
vs
GTX 950 OEM 950 OEM

Community ratings

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

3.7 430 votes

Rate Quadro K2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 1005 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K2200 or Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.