GeForce GT 520MX vs Iris Plus Graphics 640

Place in performance ranking	672	1130
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Architecture	Gen. 9.5 Kaby Lake (2015−2017)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	Kaby Lake GT3e	N12P-GVR
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	3 January 2017 (7 years ago)	30 May 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

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	48	48
CUDA cores	no data	48
Core clock speed	300 MHz	900 MHz
Boost clock speed	1050 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	189 million	292 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	20 Watt
Texture fill rate	52.80	7.200
Floating-point performance	no data	172.8 gflops
Floating-point performance	0.8448 gflops	0.1728 gflops

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

PCIe 3.0 x1

PCIe 2.0 x16

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	DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	32 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	64/128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	14.4 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

No outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	-	+
Quick Sync	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 API
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	2.1	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.103	N/A
CUDA	-	+

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.

Iris Plus Graphics 640 3.86
+422%

GT 520MX 0.74

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.

Iris Plus Graphics 640 1489
+424%

GT 520MX 284

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Iris Plus Graphics 640 2379
+299%

GT 520MX 597

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

23
+475%

4−5

−475%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

7−8
+133%

3−4

−133%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 +120%	5−6 −120%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Battlefield 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +475%	4−5 −475%
Hitman 3	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +145%	10−12 −145%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +150%	6−7 −150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +35.5%	30−35 −35.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 +120%	5−6 −120%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Battlefield 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +475%	4−5 −475%
Hitman 3	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +145%	10−12 −145%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +150%	6−7 −150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +60%	10−11 −60%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +35.5%	30−35 −35.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 +120%	5−6 −120%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +475%	4−5 −475%
Hitman 3	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +145%	10−12 −145%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +150%	6−7 −150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4 −150%	10−11 +150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +35.5%	30−35 −35.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5	0−1
Hitman 3	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 +1100%	2−3 −1100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+133%

3−4

−133%

4K
High Preset

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

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	2−3	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
+150%

2−3

−150%

This is how Iris Plus Graphics 640 and GT 520MX compete in popular games:

Iris Plus Graphics 640 is 475% 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 640 is 1100% faster.
in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 520MX is 150% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Iris Plus Graphics 640 is ahead in 34 tests (97%)
GT 520MX is ahead in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.86	0.74
Recency	3 January 2017	30 May 2011
Maximum RAM amount	32 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	20 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics 640 has a 421.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 33.3% lower power consumption.

The Iris Plus Graphics 640 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 520MX in performance tests.

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