Quadro RTX 8000 vs Iris Graphics 550

Place in the ranking	711	61
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	1.90
Power efficiency	16.95	13.18
Architecture	Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	Skylake GT3e	TU102
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	1 September 2015 (9 years ago)	13 August 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$9,999

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	384	4608
Core clock speed	300 MHz	1395 MHz
Boost clock speed	1000 MHz	1770 MHz
Number of transistors	189 million	18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm+	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	260 Watt
Texture fill rate	48.00	509.8
Floating-point processing power	0.768 TFLOPS	16.31 TFLOPS
ROPs	6	96
TMUs	48	288
Tensor Cores	no data	576
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	72

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	Ring Bus	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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	System Shared	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	48 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	672.0 GB/s
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

Portable Device Dependent

4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	2.0
Vulkan	1.3	1.2.131
CUDA	-	7.5

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.

Iris Graphics 550 3.71

RTX 8000 50.02
+1248%

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.

Iris Graphics 550 1428

RTX 8000 19278
+1250%

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	18 −1233%	240−250 +1233%
1440p	28 −1150%	350−400 +1150%
4K	50 −1200%	650−700 +1200%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	41.66
1440p	no data	28.57
4K	no data	15.38

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7

−1233%

80−85
+1233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Battlefield 5	7−8 −1186%	90−95 +1186%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 −1150%	100−105 +1150%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −1233%	80−85 +1233%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −1186%	90−95 +1186%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −1233%	280−290 +1233%
Hitman 3	7 −1186%	90−95 +1186%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 −1100%	300−310 +1100%
Metro Exodus	6−7 −1233%	80−85 +1233%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 −1233%	120−130 +1233%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 −1186%	180−190 +1186%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −1241%	550−600 +1241%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Battlefield 5	7−8 −1186%	90−95 +1186%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 −1150%	100−105 +1150%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −1233%	80−85 +1233%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −1186%	90−95 +1186%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −1233%	280−290 +1233%
Hitman 3	9−10 −1233%	120−130 +1233%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 −1100%	300−310 +1100%
Metro Exodus	6−7 −1233%	80−85 +1233%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 −1233%	120−130 +1233%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12 −1233%	160−170 +1233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	19 −1216%	250−260 +1216%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −1241%	550−600 +1241%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 −1150%	100−105 +1150%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −1233%	80−85 +1233%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −1186%	90−95 +1186%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −1233%	280−290 +1233%
Hitman 3	9−10 −1233%	120−130 +1233%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 −1100%	300−310 +1100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	15 −1233%	200−210 +1233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −1233%	200−210 +1233%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −1241%	550−600 +1241%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
−1233%

120−130

+1233%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −1233%	80−85 +1233%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −1200%	65−70 +1200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −1150%	50−55 +1150%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Hitman 3	8−9 −1150%	100−105 +1150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 −1233%	120−130 +1233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Watch Dogs: Legion	21−24 −1218%	290−300 +1218%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8

−1186%

90−95
+1186%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−1150%

50−55
+1150%

This is how Iris Graphics 550 and RTX 8000 compete in popular games:

RTX 8000 is 1233% faster in 1080p
RTX 8000 is 1150% faster in 1440p
RTX 8000 is 1200% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.71	50.02
Recency	1 September 2015	13 August 2018
Chip lithography	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	260 Watt

Iris Graphics 550 has 1633.3% lower power consumption.

RTX 8000, on the other hand, has a 1248.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 8000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Graphics 550 in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Graphics 550 is a notebook card while Quadro RTX 8000 is a workstation one.

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