FirePro S9000 vs Iris Plus Graphics 640

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Plus Graphics 640 with FirePro S9000, including specs and performance data.

Iris Plus Graphics 640
2017
32 GB DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4, 15 Watt
3.56

S9000 outperforms Plus Graphics 640 by a whopping 240% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking775447
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.44
Power efficiency18.284.14
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameKaby Lake GT3eTahiti
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date3 January 2017 (9 years ago)24 August 2012 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm++28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt350 Watt
Texture fill rate52.80100.8
Floating-point processing power0.8448 TFLOPS3.226 TFLOPS
ROPs632
TMUs48112
L1 Cacheno data448 KB
L2 Cacheno data768 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).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfaceRing BusPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount32 GB6 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared384 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1375 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data264 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 Dependent1x DisplayPort
DisplayPort countno data1
Dual-link DVI support-+

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 (12_1)12 (11_1)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.01.2
Vulkan1.31.2.131

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 Plus Graphics 640 3.56
FirePro S9000 12.10
+240%

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 Plus Graphics 640 1489
Samples: 942
FirePro S9000 5059
+240%
Samples: 6

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
−233%
70−75
+233%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data35.70

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−208%
40−45
+208%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 5−6
−220%
16−18
+220%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 14−16
−221%
45−50
+221%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−208%
40−45
+208%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Fortnite 20−22
−225%
65−70
+225%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−224%
55−60
+224%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
−233%
30−33
+233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−233%
50−55
+233%
Valorant 50−55
−233%
170−180
+233%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 14−16
−221%
45−50
+221%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−208%
40−45
+208%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
−238%
220−230
+238%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
Dota 2 29
−228%
95−100
+228%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Fortnite 20−22
−225%
65−70
+225%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−224%
55−60
+224%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
−233%
30−33
+233%
Grand Theft Auto V 6
−200%
18−20
+200%
Metro Exodus 6−7
−200%
18−20
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−233%
50−55
+233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−218%
35−40
+218%
Valorant 50−55
−233%
170−180
+233%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 14−16
−221%
45−50
+221%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
Dota 2 21
−233%
70−75
+233%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−224%
55−60
+224%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−233%
50−55
+233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
−200%
12−14
+200%
Valorant 50−55
−233%
170−180
+233%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 20−22
−225%
65−70
+225%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−238%
27−30
+238%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
−233%
90−95
+233%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
−233%
100−105
+233%
Valorant 35−40
−233%
120−130
+233%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−200%
18−20
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−233%
30−33
+233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−220%
16−18
+220%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−233%
50−55
+233%
Valorant 18−20
−233%
60−65
+233%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Dota 2 10−12
−218%
35−40
+218%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%

This is how Iris Plus Graphics 640 and FirePro S9000 compete in popular games:

  • FirePro S9000 is 233% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.56 12.10
Recency 3 January 2017 24 August 2012
Maximum RAM amount 32 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 350 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics 640 has an age advantage of 4 years, a 433% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 2233% lower power consumption.

FirePro S9000, on the other hand, has a 240% higher aggregate performance score.

The FirePro S9000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Plus Graphics 640 in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Plus Graphics 640 is a notebook graphics card while FirePro S9000 is a workstation one.

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.


3.3 322 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 640 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 7 votes

Rate FirePro S9000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Iris Plus Graphics 640 or FirePro S9000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.