Quadro K510M vs Iris Xe Graphics G7

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Xe Graphics G7 with Quadro K510M, including specs and performance data.

Iris Xe Graphics G7
2020
10.05
+517%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 outperforms K510M by a whopping 517% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking445952
Place by popularity17not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data3.84
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeGK208
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date15 August 2020 (4 years ago)23 July 2013 (11 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 cores96192
Core clock speedno data846 MHz
Number of transistorsno data915 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data30 Watt
Texture fill rateno data13.54
Floating-point processing powerno data0.3249 TFLOPS
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data16

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 datamedium sized
Interfaceno dataMXM-A (3.0)

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 typeDDR4GDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data1 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data600 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data19.2 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs
Display Portno data1.2

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+
Quick Sync+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX 12_112
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.5
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-+
CUDA-+

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+1550%
2−3
−1550%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+583%
6−7
−583%
Fortnite 60−65
+567%
9−10
−567%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+310%
10−11
−310%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+558%
12−14
−558%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+286%
7−8
−286%
Valorant 40−45
+567%
6−7
−567%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+1550%
2−3
−1550%
Dota 2 35−40
+1133%
3−4
−1133%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+242%
12−14
−242%
Fortnite 60−65
+650%
8−9
−650%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+310%
10−11
−310%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+1133%
3−4
−1133%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+2700%
1−2
−2700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+365%
16−18
−365%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+286%
7−8
−286%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+288%
8−9
−288%
Valorant 40−45
+567%
6−7
−567%
World of Tanks 140−150
+345%
30−35
−345%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+1550%
2−3
−1550%
Dota 2 35−40
+1133%
3−4
−1133%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+242%
12−14
−242%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+310%
10−11
−310%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+365%
16−18
−365%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+520%
5−6
−520%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 60−65
+567%
9−10
−567%

1440p
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Valorant 24−27
+525%
4−5
−525%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+267%
6−7
−267%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+667%
3−4
−667%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+550%
4−5
−550%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+33.3%
14−16
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 5−6 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+33.3%
14−16
−33.3%
Valorant 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Dota 2 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+650%
4−5
−650%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
World of Tanks 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 is 2700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 is ahead in 27 tests (57%)
  • there's a draw in 20 tests (43%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.05 1.63
Recency 15 August 2020 23 July 2013
Chip lithography 10 nm 28 nm

Iris Xe Graphics G7 has a 516.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K510M in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Xe Graphics G7 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K510M 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 Xe Graphics G7
Iris Xe Graphics G7
NVIDIA Quadro K510M
Quadro K510M

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.


3.5 2656 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 2 votes

Rate Quadro K510M 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.