Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs Quadro P5000

Place in the ranking	166	528
Place by popularity	not in top-100	65
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	6.37	no data
Power efficiency	12.42	18.56
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code name	GP104	Tiger Lake Xe
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	1 October 2016 (8 years ago)	15 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$2,499	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 cores	2048	80
Core clock speed	1607 MHz	400 MHz
Boost clock speed	1733 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	277.3	no data
Floating-point processing power	8.873 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	64	no data
TMUs	160	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	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	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	16 GB	no data
Memory bus width	256 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1127 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	192 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	1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort	no data
Display Port	1.4	no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	+	-
3D Stereo	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data
Quick Sync	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12_1
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.5	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	95 +400%	19 −400%
1440p	40−45 +300%	10 −300%
4K	39 +129%	17 −129%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	26.31	no data
1440p	62.48	no data
4K	64.08	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

55−60
+293%

−293%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	70−75 +268%	18−20 −268%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 +195%	19 −195%
Battlefield 5	100−110 +377%	21−24 −377%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +340%	14−16 −340%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +323%	13 −323%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +324%	16−18 −324%
Far Cry New Dawn	80−85 +290%	21−24 −290%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +251%	45−50 −251%
Hitman 3	65−70 +325%	16 −325%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +228%	40−45 −228%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +184%	38 −184%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +300%	20−22 −300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	110−120 +356%	24−27 −356%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +90.3%	62 −90.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	70−75 +268%	18−20 −268%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 +250%	16 −250%
Battlefield 5	100−110 +377%	21−24 −377%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +340%	14−16 −340%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +450%	10 −450%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +324%	16−18 −324%
Far Cry New Dawn	80−85 +290%	21−24 −290%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +251%	45−50 −251%
Hitman 3	65−70 +353%	15 −353%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +228%	40−45 −228%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +300%	27 −300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +300%	20−22 −300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	110−120 +375%	24 −375%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 +209%	21−24 −209%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +141%	49 −141%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	70−75 +268%	18−20 −268%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 +460%	10−11 −460%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +340%	14−16 −340%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +588%	8 −588%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +324%	16−18 −324%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +251%	45−50 −251%
Hitman 3	65−70 +467%	12 −467%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +781%	16 −781%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	110−120 +470%	20 −470%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	53 +382%	11 −382%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +115%	55−60 −115%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

80−85
+300%

20−22

−300%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 +336%	14−16 −336%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 +345%	10−12 −345%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +386%	7−8 −386%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +1033%	3−4 −1033%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +443%	7−8 −443%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +667%	3−4 −667%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +311%	9−10 −311%
Forza Horizon 4	180−190 +589%	27−30 −589%
Hitman 3	40−45 +264%	10−12 −264%
Horizon Zero Dawn	65−70 +331%	16−18 −331%
Metro Exodus	60−65 +663%	8−9 −663%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 +369%	16 −369%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +340%	10 −340%
Watch Dogs: Legion	170−180 +262%	45−50 −262%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

55−60
+323%

12−14

−323%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +433%	6−7 −433%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 +420%	5−6 −420%
Hitman 3	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%
Horizon Zero Dawn	150−160 +536%	24−27 −536%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +680%	5−6 −680%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	36 +800%	4−5 −800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +425%	4−5 −425%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +567%	3−4 −567%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +350%	4−5 −350%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +450%	8−9 −450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40−45 +2000%	2−3 −2000%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

27−30
+300%

7−8

−300%

This is how Quadro P5000 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:

Quadro P5000 is 400% faster in 1080p
Quadro P5000 is 300% faster in 1440p
Quadro P5000 is 129% faster in 4K

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

in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P5000 is 2000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, Quadro P5000 surpassed Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs in all 72 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	32.62	7.58
Recency	1 October 2016	15 August 2020
Chip lithography	16 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	28 Watt

Quadro P5000 has a 330.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 60% more advanced lithography process, and 257.1% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P5000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P5000 is a workstation card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is a notebook one.

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