Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX150
Combined performance score
GeForce MX150 outperforms Iris Pro Graphics P580 by 13% in our combined benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 553 | 578 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Value for money | 1.25 | no data |
Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Gen. 9 Skylake (2015−2016) |
GPU code name | N17S-G1 | Skylake GT4e |
Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
Release date | 16 May 2017 (6 years old) | 1 September 2015 (8 years old) |
Current price | $1049 | no data |
Technical specs
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
Pipelines / CUDA cores | 384 | 72 |
Core clock speed | 1468 MHz | 350 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1532 MHz | 1100 MHz |
Number of transistors | 1,800 million | 189 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 14 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt (10 - 25 Watt TGP) | 15 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 24.91 | 75.60 |
Floating-point performance | 1,127 gflops | no data |
Size and compatibility
Information on GeForce MX150 and Iris Pro Graphics P580 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
Laptop size | large | no data |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x1 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
Memory
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 | DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4 |
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 64 GB |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | eDRAM + 64/128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 6008 MHz | System Shared |
Memory bandwidth | 40.1 GB/s | no data |
Shared memory | - | + |
Video outputs and ports
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 outputs |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
Quick Sync | no data | + |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.4 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.1 |
Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.1.97 |
CUDA | 6.1 | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance 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.
GeForce MX150 outperforms Iris Pro Graphics P580 by 13% in our combined benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
GeForce MX150 outperforms Iris Pro Graphics P580 by 13% in Passmark.
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 | 27
+28.6%
| 21−24
−28.6%
|
1440p | 24
+14.3%
| 21−24
−14.3%
|
4K | 19
+18.8%
| 16−18
−18.8%
|
Performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 19
+90%
|
10−11
−90%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Battlefield 5 | 39
+144%
|
16−18
−144%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 22
+29.4%
|
16−18
−29.4%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 11
+22.2%
|
9−10
−22.2%
|
Far Cry 5 | 17
+54.5%
|
10−12
−54.5%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 18
+50%
|
12−14
−50%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 25
+47.1%
|
16−18
−47.1%
|
Hitman 3 | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 12
+20%
|
10−11
−20%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 14
+40%
|
10−11
−40%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 17
+30.8%
|
12−14
−30.8%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 14
+100%
|
7−8
−100%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 13
+30%
|
10−11
−30%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Battlefield 5 | 32
+100%
|
16−18
−100%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 7
−143%
|
16−18
+143%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 7
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
Far Cry 5 | 16
+45.5%
|
10−12
−45.5%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 17
+41.7%
|
12−14
−41.7%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 21
+23.5%
|
16−18
−23.5%
|
Hitman 3 | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
Metro Exodus | 6
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 11
−18.2%
|
12−14
+18.2%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 19
+72.7%
|
10−12
−72.7%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 11
+57.1%
|
7−8
−57.1%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 7
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Battlefield 5 | 26
+62.5%
|
16−18
−62.5%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
Far Cry 5 | 14
+27.3%
|
10−12
−27.3%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 15
+25%
|
12−14
−25%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 14
−21.4%
|
16−18
+21.4%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 11
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
1440p
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
Hitman 3 | 10
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Battlefield 5 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 1−2 | 0−1 |
This is how GeForce MX150 and Iris Pro Graphics P580 compete in popular games:
1080p resolution:
- GeForce MX150 is 28.6% faster than Iris Pro Graphics P580
1440p resolution:
- GeForce MX150 is 14.3% faster than Iris Pro Graphics P580
4K resolution:
- GeForce MX150 is 18.8% faster than Iris Pro Graphics P580
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GeForce MX150 is 200% faster than the Iris Pro Graphics P580.
- in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Pro Graphics P580 is 143% faster than the GeForce MX150.
All in all, in popular games:
- GeForce MX150 is ahead in 45 tests (71%)
- Iris Pro Graphics P580 is ahead in 6 tests (10%)
- there's a draw in 12 tests (19%)
Advantages and disadvantages
Performance score | 5.88 | 5.21 |
Recency | 16 May 2017 | 1 September 2015 |
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 64 GB |
Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 15 Watt |
The GeForce MX150 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Pro Graphics P580 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.