Iris Plus Graphics 645 vs GeForce GT 220

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 220 with Iris Plus Graphics 645, including specs and performance data.

GT 220
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 58 Watt
0.57

Iris Plus Graphics 645 outperforms GT 220 by a whopping 681% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1215662
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.7221.77
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGT216Coffee Lake GT3e
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date12 October 2009 (14 years ago)7 October 2019 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$79.99 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 cores48384
CUDA cores48no data
Core clock speed625 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1050 MHz
Number of transistors486 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)58 Watt15 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate9.84050.40
Floating-point processing power0.1277 TFLOPS0.8064 TFLOPS
ROPs86
TMUs1648

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).

Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16Ring Bus
Length168 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width1-slotno 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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed790 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth25.3 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 ConnectorsVGADVIHDMIPortable Device Dependent
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIF + HDAno data

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.

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.16.4
OpenGL3.14.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+-

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.

GT 220 0.57
Iris Plus Graphics 645 4.45
+681%

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.

GT 220 218
Iris Plus Graphics 645 1715
+687%

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 HD21
−19%
25
+19%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−175%
10−12
+175%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−1000%
10−12
+1000%
Hitman 3 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−150%
14−16
+150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−43.3%
40−45
+43.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−175%
10−12
+175%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−1000%
10−12
+1000%
Hitman 3 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−150%
14−16
+150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−60%
16−18
+60%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−43.3%
40−45
+43.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−175%
10−12
+175%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Hitman 3 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−150%
14−16
+150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−60%
16−18
+60%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−43.3%
40−45
+43.3%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 4−5
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Hitman 3 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−2400%
24−27
+2400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 2−3

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hitman 3 0−1 0−1
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how GT 220 and Iris Plus Graphics 645 compete in popular games:

  • Iris Plus Graphics 645 is 19% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Iris Plus Graphics 645 is 2400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Iris Plus Graphics 645 is ahead in 35 tests (57%)
  • there's a draw in 26 tests (43%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.57 4.45
Recency 12 October 2009 7 October 2019
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 58 Watt 15 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics 645 has a 680.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 286.7% lower power consumption.

The Iris Plus Graphics 645 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 220 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 220 is a desktop card while Iris Plus Graphics 645 is a notebook 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 GeForce GT 220
GeForce GT 220
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.


3.1 744 votes

Rate GeForce GT 220 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.