Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs vs Quadro P2200

Place in the ranking	234	478
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	22.32	22.72
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code name	GP106	Tiger Lake Xe
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	10 June 2019 (5 years ago)	15 August 2020 (4 years ago)

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 cores	1280	96
Core clock speed	1000 MHz	400 MHz
Boost clock speed	1493 MHz	1350 MHz
Number of transistors	4,400 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	28 Watt
Texture fill rate	119.4	no data
Floating-point processing power	3.822 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	40	no data
TMUs	80	no 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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Length	201 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	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 type	GDDR5X	no data
Maximum RAM amount	5 GB	no data
Memory bus width	160 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1251 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	200.2 GB/s	no 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 Connectors

4x DisplayPort

no data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12_1
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	-
CUDA	6.1	-

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 HD	70−75 +159%	27 −159%
1440p	40−45 +150%	16 −150%
4K	27−30 +145%	11 −145%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	15 +0%	15 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	20 +0%	20 +0%
Elden Ring	21 +0%	21 +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%
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%
Elden Ring	22 +0%	22 +0%
Far Cry 5	31 +0%	31 +0%
Fortnite	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30 +0%	30 +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	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
World of Tanks	96 +0%	96 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +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%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Valorant	23 +0%	23 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	7 +0%	7 +0%
Elden Ring	15 +0%	15 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	7 +0%	7 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +0%	45−50 +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	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3 +0%	3 +0%
Far Cry 5	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	19 +0%	19 +0%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Valorant	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Dota 2	8 +0%	8 +0%
Elden Ring	7 +0%	7 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	8 +0%	8 +0%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +0%	5−6 +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	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	20 +0%	20 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Fortnite	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	11 +0%	11 +0%
Valorant	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

This is how Quadro P2200 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs compete in popular games:

Quadro P2200 is 159% faster in 1080p
Quadro P2200 is 150% faster in 1440p
Quadro P2200 is 145% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	24.32	9.24
Recency	10 June 2019	15 August 2020
Chip lithography	16 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	28 Watt

Quadro P2200 has a 163.2% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 60% more advanced lithography process, and 167.9% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P2200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P2200 is a workstation card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.