Iris Plus Graphics vs Quadro M520

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M520 with Iris Plus Graphics, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M520
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 25 Watt
4.89
+3.6%

M520 outperforms Iris Plus Graphics by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking639650
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.4621.66
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Generation 11.0 (2019−2021)
GPU code nameGM108Ice Lake GT2
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date11 January 2017 (8 years ago)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 cores384512
Core clock speed1041 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1019 MHz1000 MHz
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate16.6632.00
Floating-point processing power0.7995 TFLOPS1.024 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs1632

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)PCIe 3.0 x1
Widthno dataIGP
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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1253 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth40 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.1.126-
CUDA5.0-

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.

Quadro M520 4.89
+3.6%
Iris Plus Graphics 4.72

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.

Quadro M520 1881
+3.7%
Iris Plus Graphics 1814

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 HD20
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
4K13
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Elden Ring 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Valorant 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Dota 2 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Elden Ring 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+14.3%
21−24
−14.3%
Fortnite 27−30
+7.4%
27−30
−7.4%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+5%
40−45
−5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Valorant 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
World of Tanks 80−85
+6.7%
75−80
−6.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Dota 2 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+14.3%
21−24
−14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+5%
40−45
−5%
Valorant 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Elden Ring 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
World of Tanks 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Valorant 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Elden Ring 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Fortnite 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Valorant 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

This is how Quadro M520 and Iris Plus Graphics compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M520 is 11% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M520 is 8% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.89 4.72
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 15 Watt

Quadro M520 has a 3.6% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Plus Graphics, on the other hand, has a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro M520 and Iris Plus Graphics.

Be aware that Quadro M520 is a mobile workstation card while Iris Plus Graphics is a desktop 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 M520
Quadro M520
Intel Iris Plus Graphics
Iris Plus Graphics

Other comparisons

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 31 vote

Rate Quadro M520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 376 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 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.