Iris Graphics 5100 vs GeForce GTX 775M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 775M and Iris Graphics 5100, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
775M outperforms Graphics 5100 by a whopping 444% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 509 | 988 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 7.44 | 4.56 |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | Generation 7.5 (2013) |
| GPU code name | N13E-GTX-A2 | Haswell GT3 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 24 September 2013 (12 years ago) | 27 May 2013 (13 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1344 | 320 |
| Core clock speed | 719 MHz | 200 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1100 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3540 Million | 1,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 30 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 44.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.704 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 4 |
| TMUs | no data | 40 |
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 | no data | Ring Bus |
| SLI options | + | - |
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 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 3600 MHz | System Shared |
| Shared memory | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | Portable Device Dependent |
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 and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11 | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.3 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | + |
| CUDA | + | - |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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.
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
+438%
| 13
−438%
|
| 4K | 35−40
+400%
| 7
−400%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 24−27
+500%
|
4−5
−500%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+2500%
|
2−3
−2500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+567%
|
3−4
−567%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 24−27
+500%
|
4−5
−500%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+975%
|
4−5
−975%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+2500%
|
2−3
−2500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+567%
|
3−4
−567%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+675%
|
4−5
−675%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+729%
|
7−8
−729%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+367%
|
9−10
−367%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+218%
|
10−12
−218%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+139%
|
35−40
−139%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 24−27
+500%
|
4−5
−500%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+975%
|
4−5
−975%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+2500%
|
2−3
−2500%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 140−150
+371%
|
31
−371%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+567%
|
3−4
−567%
|
| Dota 2 | 70−75
+289%
|
18
−289%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+675%
|
4−5
−675%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+729%
|
7−8
−729%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+367%
|
9−10
−367%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35−40
+1700%
|
2−3
−1700%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+218%
|
10−12
−218%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+213%
|
8−9
−213%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+139%
|
35−40
−139%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+975%
|
4−5
−975%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+567%
|
3−4
−567%
|
| Dota 2 | 70−75
+312%
|
17
−312%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+675%
|
4−5
−675%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+367%
|
9−10
−367%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+218%
|
10−12
−218%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+213%
|
8−9
−213%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+139%
|
35−40
−139%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 55−60
+729%
|
7−8
−729%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
+350%
|
4−5
−350%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 70−75
+517%
|
12−14
−517%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+550%
|
2−3
−550%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 50−55
+178%
|
18−20
−178%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
+586%
|
14−16
−586%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+500%
|
4−5
−500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 20−22
+900%
|
2−3
−900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+475%
|
4−5
−475%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+333%
|
3−4
−333%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 20−22
+567%
|
3−4
−567%
|
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+33.3%
|
14−16
−33.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
+378%
|
9−10
−378%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+500%
|
2−3
−500%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+500%
|
6
−500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+700%
|
2−3
−700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
This is how GTX 775M and Iris Graphics 5100 compete in popular games:
- GTX 775M is 438% faster in 1080p
- GTX 775M is 400% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the GTX 775M is 2500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, GTX 775M surpassed Iris Graphics 5100 in all 52 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.62 | 1.77 |
| Recency | 24 September 2013 | 27 May 2013 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 30 Watt |
GTX 775M has a 444% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 3 months.
Iris Graphics 5100, on the other hand, has a 27% more advanced lithography process, and 233% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 775M is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Graphics 5100 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
