Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs Quadro P4200

Place in the ranking	217	531
Place by popularity	not in top-100	73
Power efficiency	17.34	18.59
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code name	GP104	Tiger Lake Xe
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	21 February 2018 (6 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	2304	80
Core clock speed	1227 MHz	400 MHz
Boost clock speed	1647 MHz	1350 MHz
Number of transistors	7,200 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	28 Watt
Texture fill rate	237.2	no data
Floating-point processing power	7.589 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	64	no data
TMUs	144	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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	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	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	no data
Memory bus width	256 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1502 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	192.3 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

No outputs

no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	+	-
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	60−65 +216%	19 −216%
1440p	30−35 +200%	10 −200%
4K	45−50 +200%	15 −200%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +327%	11 −327%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +264%	14 −264%
Elden Ring	80−85 +361%	18 −361%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +221%	24−27 −221%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +292%	12 −292%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +325%	12 −325%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +270%	30 −270%
Metro Exodus	65−70 +144%	27 −144%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 +162%	21−24 −162%
Valorant	100−110 +461%	18 −461%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +221%	24−27 −221%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +370%	10 −370%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +920%	5 −920%
Dota 2	85−90 +295%	22 −295%
Elden Ring	80−85 +388%	17 −388%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +196%	26 −196%
Fortnite	120−130 +180%	45−50 −180%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +363%	24 −363%
Grand Theft Auto V	85−90 +562%	13 −562%
Metro Exodus	65−70 +288%	17 −288%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 +159%	60−65 −159%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 +817%	6 −817%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	80−85 +257%	21−24 −257%
Valorant	100−110 +621%	14 −621%
World of Tanks	250−260 +125%	110−120 −125%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +221%	24−27 −221%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +422%	9 −422%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +1175%	4 −1175%
Dota 2	85−90 +142%	36 −142%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +133%	30−35 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +455%	20 −455%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 +159%	60−65 −159%
Valorant	100−110 +274%	27−30 −274%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	40−45 +600%	6 −600%
Elden Ring	45−50 +350%	10−11 −350%
Grand Theft Auto V	40−45 +617%	6 −617%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +338%	40−45 −338%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +283%	6−7 −283%
World of Tanks	160−170 +204%	55−60 −204%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +264%	14−16 −264%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +433%	6 −433%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +250%	6−7 −250%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +363%	16−18 −363%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +319%	16 −319%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +383%	12−14 −383%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 +280%	10 −280%
Valorant	65−70 +258%	18−20 −258%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +2200%	1−2 −2200%
Dota 2	40−45 +144%	18−20 −144%
Elden Ring	20−22 +400%	4−5 −400%
Grand Theft Auto V	40−45 +144%	18−20 −144%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 +250%	21−24 −250%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +220%	5−6 −220%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +144%	18−20 −144%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +333%	6−7 −333%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +2200%	1−2 −2200%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +350%	2−3 −350%
Dota 2	40−45 +175%	16 −175%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +267%	9−10 −267%
Fortnite	30−35 +343%	7−8 −343%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +333%	9−10 −333%
Valorant	30−35 +371%	7−8 −371%

This is how Quadro P4200 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:

Quadro P4200 is 216% faster in 1080p
Quadro P4200 is 200% faster in 1440p
Quadro P4200 is 200% faster in 4K

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

in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro P4200 is 2200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, Quadro P4200 surpassed Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	25.23	7.57
Recency	21 February 2018	15 August 2020
Chip lithography	16 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	28 Watt

Quadro P4200 has a 233.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 60% more advanced lithography process, and 257.1% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P4200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P4200 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.