Quadro FX 1700M vs Iris Plus Graphics 655

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking658not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency20.86no data
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameCoffee Lake GT3eG96
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date3 April 2018 (6 years ago)1 October 2008 (16 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 cores38432
Core clock speed300 MHz625 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm+++65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate50.4010.00
Floating-point processing power0.8064 TFLOPS0.0992 TFLOPS
ROPs68
TMUs4816

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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfaceRing BusMXM-II

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 SharedGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared512 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data25.6 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 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 compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL3.01.1
Vulkan1.3N/A
CUDA-1.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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 655 1733
+908%
FX 1700M 172

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 April 2018 1 October 2008
Chip lithography 14 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 50 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics 655 has an age advantage of 9 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Iris Plus Graphics 655 and Quadro FX 1700M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Iris Plus Graphics 655 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro FX 1700M is a mobile workstation one.


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

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 Plus Graphics 655
Iris Plus Graphics 655
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700M
Quadro FX 1700M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.6 331 vote

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 655 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Quadro FX 1700M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.