Quadro P3200 Max-Q vs Iris Graphics 6100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Graphics 6100 with Quadro P3200 Max-Q, including specs and performance data.

Iris Graphics 6100
2015
15 Watt
2.14

P3200 Max-Q outperforms Graphics 6100 by a whopping 909% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking912292
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency11.0022.21
ArchitectureGeneration 8.0 (2014−2015)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameBroadwell GT3GP104
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date5 January 2015 (10 years ago)21 February 2018 (7 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores3841792
Core clock speed300 MHz1139 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1404 MHz
Number of transistors189 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate48.00157.2
Floating-point processing power0.768 TFLOPS5.032 TFLOPS
ROPs664
TMUs48112
L1 Cacheno data672 KB
L2 Cacheno data1536 KB

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).

InterfaceRing BusMXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared6 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared192 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1753 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data168.3 GB/s
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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL3.01.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA-6.1

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.

Iris Graphics 6100 2.14
P3200 Max-Q 21.60
+909%

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 6100 899
Samples: 650
P3200 Max-Q 9077
+910%
Samples: 143

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 HD14
−900%
140−150
+900%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Escape from Tarkov 7−8
−900%
70−75
+900%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Fortnite 10−11
−900%
100−105
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−900%
110−120
+900%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−900%
120−130
+900%
Valorant 40−45
−900%
400−450
+900%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 33
−809%
300−310
+809%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Dota 2 21
−900%
210−220
+900%
Escape from Tarkov 7−8
−900%
70−75
+900%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Fortnite 10−11
−900%
100−105
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−900%
110−120
+900%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−900%
120−130
+900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−900%
80−85
+900%
Valorant 40−45
−900%
400−450
+900%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Dota 2 18
−900%
180−190
+900%
Escape from Tarkov 7−8
−900%
70−75
+900%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−900%
110−120
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−900%
120−130
+900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−900%
80−85
+900%
Valorant 40−45
−900%
400−450
+900%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 10−11
−900%
100−105
+900%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
−900%
160−170
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
−900%
210−220
+900%
Valorant 16−18
−900%
170−180
+900%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Escape from Tarkov 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−900%
150−160
+900%
Valorant 10−12
−900%
110−120
+900%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Escape from Tarkov 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%

This is how Iris Graphics 6100 and P3200 Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • P3200 Max-Q is 900% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.14 21.60
Recency 5 January 2015 21 February 2018
Chip lithography 14 nm 16 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 75 Watt

Iris Graphics 6100 has a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

P3200 Max-Q, on the other hand, has a 909.3% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 3 years.

The Quadro P3200 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Graphics 6100 in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Graphics 6100 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro P3200 Max-Q is a mobile workstation one.

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.


Intel Iris Graphics 6100
Iris Graphics 6100
NVIDIA Quadro P3200 Max-Q
Quadro P3200 Max-Q

Other comparisons

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.


3.2 147 votes

Rate Iris Graphics 6100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 26 votes

Rate Quadro P3200 Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Iris Graphics 6100 or Quadro P3200 Max-Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.