Quadro K2000 vs Iris Plus Graphics 655

Place in performance ranking	642	648
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Value for money	0.95	0.30
Architecture	Gen. 9.5 Kaby Lake (2015−2017)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	Kaby Lake GT3e	GK107
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	1 September 2017 (6 years ago)	1 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$599
Current price	$999	$550 (0.9x MSRP)

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Iris Plus Graphics 655 has 217% better value for money than Quadro K2000.

Technical specs

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	384
Core clock speed	300 MHz	954 MHz
Boost clock speed	1200 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	189 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	51 Watt
Texture fill rate	50.40	30.53
Floating-point performance	no data	732.7 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on Iris Plus Graphics 655 and Quadro K2000 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x1	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	202 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

Memory

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	DDR3/DDR4	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	2 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	4000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	64 GB/s
Shared memory	+	no data

Video outputs and ports

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

1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort

Technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API support

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.1	1.2
Vulkan	1.1.103	+
CUDA	no data	3.0

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 655 4.20
+3.2%

Quadro K2000 4.07

Iris Plus Graphics 655 outperforms Quadro K2000 by 3% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

Iris Plus Graphics 655 1739
+10.3%

Quadro K2000 1577

Iris Plus Graphics 655 outperforms Quadro K2000 by 10% in Passmark.

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	21 +16.7%	18−21 −16.7%
1440p	15 +7.1%	14−16 −7.1%
4K	16 +14.3%	14−16 −14.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

7−8
+16.7%

6−7

−16.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Battlefield 5	12−14 +20%	10−11 −20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +7.1%	14−16 −7.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Far Cry 5	11 +10%	10−11 −10%
Far Cry New Dawn	11 +10%	10−11 −10%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +8.3%	12−14 −8.3%
Hitman 3	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12 +20%	10−11 −20%
Watch Dogs: Legion	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Battlefield 5	12−14 +20%	10−11 −20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +7.1%	14−16 −7.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Far Cry 5	10 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	10 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +8.3%	12−14 −8.3%
Hitman 3	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Metro Exodus	6 +20%	5−6 −20%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5 +25%	4−5 −25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	11 +10%	10−11 −10%
Watch Dogs: Legion	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Battlefield 5	12−14 +20%	10−11 −20%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Far Cry 5	9 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	9 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +8.3%	12−14 −8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6 +20%	5−6 −20%
Watch Dogs: Legion	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Hitman 3	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Hitman 3	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

This is how Iris Plus Graphics 655 and Quadro K2000 compete in popular games:

Iris Plus Graphics 655 is 16.7% faster than Quadro K2000 in 1080p
Iris Plus Graphics 655 is 7.1% faster than Quadro K2000 in 1440p
Iris Plus Graphics 655 is 14.3% faster than Quadro K2000 in 4K

Advantages and disadvantages

Performance score	4.20	4.07
Recency	1 September 2017	1 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	2 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	51 Watt