Iris Plus Graphics 645 vs Quadro P2000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P2000 with Iris Plus Graphics 645, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P2000
2017
5 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
18.83
+324%

P2000 outperforms Iris Plus Graphics 645 by a whopping 324% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking290658
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.79no data
Power efficiency17.9321.14
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGP106Coffee Lake GT3e
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date6 February 2017 (7 years ago)7 October 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$585 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 cores1024384
Core clock speed1076 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1480 MHz1050 MHz
Number of transistors4,400 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology16 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate94.7250.40
Floating-point processing power3.031 TFLOPS0.8064 TFLOPS
ROPs406
TMUs6448

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 3.0 x16Ring Bus
Length201 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
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 amount5 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width160 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1752 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth140.2 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 Connectors4x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.3
CUDA6.1-

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 P2000 18.83
+324%
Iris Plus Graphics 645 4.44

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 P2000 7268
+324%
Iris Plus Graphics 645 1715

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.

Quadro P2000 8387
+181%
Iris Plus Graphics 645 2985

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.

Quadro P2000 6847
+262%
Iris Plus Graphics 645 1893

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 HD60
+131%
26
−131%
1440p21
+425%
4−5
−425%
4K15
+400%
3−4
−400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+329%
7−8
−329%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+282%
10−12
−282%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+933%
3−4
−933%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+589%
9−10
−589%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+322%
9−10
−322%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+329%
7−8
−329%
Far Cry 5 42
+425%
8−9
−425%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+364%
10−12
−364%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+392%
24−27
−392%
Hitman 3 35−40
+311%
9−10
−311%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+241%
27−30
−241%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+713%
8−9
−713%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+410%
10−11
−410%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 77
+413%
14−16
−413%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+105%
40−45
−105%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+282%
10−12
−282%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+933%
3−4
−933%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+589%
9−10
−589%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+322%
9−10
−322%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+329%
7−8
−329%
Far Cry 5 33
+313%
8−9
−313%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+364%
10−12
−364%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+392%
24−27
−392%
Hitman 3 35−40
+311%
9−10
−311%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+241%
27−30
−241%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+713%
8−9
−713%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+410%
10−11
−410%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+313%
14−16
−313%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+169%
16−18
−169%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+105%
40−45
−105%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+282%
10−12
−282%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+933%
3−4
−933%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+322%
9−10
−322%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+329%
7−8
−329%
Far Cry 5 26
+225%
8−9
−225%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+392%
24−27
−392%
Hitman 3 35−40
+311%
9−10
−311%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+241%
27−30
−241%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+313%
14−16
−313%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 25
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+105%
40−45
−105%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+410%
10−11
−410%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+414%
7−8
−414%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+383%
6−7
−383%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+375%
4−5
−375%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Far Cry 5 14
+180%
5−6
−180%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+2500%
4−5
−2500%
Hitman 3 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+322%
9−10
−322%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+338%
8−9
−338%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+375%
8−9
−375%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+348%
24−27
−348%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+288%
8−9
−288%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+800%
2−3
−800%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Hitman 3 14−16 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+362%
21−24
−362%
Metro Exodus 20−22 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+333%
3−4
−333%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 7
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+425%
4−5
−425%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%

This is how Quadro P2000 and Iris Plus Graphics 645 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P2000 is 131% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P2000 is 425% faster in 1440p
  • Quadro P2000 is 400% faster in 4K

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P2000 is 2500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Quadro P2000 surpassed Iris Plus Graphics 645 in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.83 4.44
Recency 6 February 2017 7 October 2019
Chip lithography 16 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 15 Watt

Quadro P2000 has a 324.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Plus Graphics 645, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Plus Graphics 645 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P2000 is a workstation graphics card while Iris Plus Graphics 645 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 P2000
Quadro P2000
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645
Iris Plus Graphics 645

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.


3.5 624 votes

Rate Quadro P2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 116 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 645 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.