UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs vs Quadro K500M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro K500M with UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs, including specs and performance data.
UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs outperforms Quadro K500M by a whopping 255% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 1002 | 629 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.61 | no data |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | Gen. 12 (2021) |
| GPU code name | N14M-Q1 | Tiger Lake Xe |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 June 2012 (12 years ago) | 30 March 2021 (3 years ago) |
| Current price | $19.95 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 | 192 | 32 |
| Core clock speed | 850 MHz | 350 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1450 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,270 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 13.60 | no data |
| Floating-point performance | 326.4 gflops | no data |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on Quadro K500M and UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. 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.
| Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | no data |
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 | DDR3 / GDDR5 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 12.8 GB/s | no data |
| 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 | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | + | no data |
| Quick Sync | no data | + |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | DirectX 12_1 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | no data |
| Vulkan | + | no data |
| CUDA | + | no data |
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 | 4−5
−300%
| 16
+300%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−233%
|
10−11
+233%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3 | no data |
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5 | no data |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−233%
|
10−11
+233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | no data |
| Far Cry New Dawn | 3−4 | no data |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | no data |
| Hitman 3 | 3−4 | no data |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 14−16 | no data |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3 | no data |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9 | no data |
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 10−12 | no data |
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3 | no data |
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5 | no data |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−233%
|
10−11
+233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | no data |
| Far Cry New Dawn | 3−4 | no data |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | no data |
| Hitman 3 | 3−4 | no data |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 14−16 | no data |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3 | no data |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9 | no data |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5 | no data |
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 10−12 | no data |
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3 | no data |
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
−250%
|
14−16
+250%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−233%
|
10−11
+233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | no data |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | no data |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 14−16
−221%
|
45−50
+221%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9
−238%
|
27−30
+238%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5 | no data |
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 10−12 | no data |
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2 | no data |
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
−250%
|
14−16
+250%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | no data |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2 | no data |
| Hitman 3 | 7−8
−243%
|
24−27
+243%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 4−5
−250%
|
14−16
+250%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
−250%
|
14−16
+250%
|
4K
High Preset
| Far Cry New Dawn | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 1−2 | no data |
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3 | no data |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 0−1 | no data |
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | no data |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−250%
|
14−16
+250%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−233%
|
10−11
+233%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 11
−218%
|
35−40
+218%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 18
−233%
|
60−65
+233%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 9
−233%
|
30−33
+233%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 16
−244%
|
55−60
+244%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6
−250%
|
21−24
+250%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 3−4
−233%
|
10−11
+233%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 15
−233%
|
50−55
+233%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 12−14
−233%
|
40−45
+233%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 6−7
−250%
|
21−24
+250%
|
| Hitman 3 | 9−10
−233%
|
30−33
+233%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−11
−250%
|
35−40
+250%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 8−9
−238%
|
27−30
+238%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−238%
|
27−30
+238%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 6−7
−250%
|
21−24
+250%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
| Hitman 3 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6−7
−250%
|
21−24
+250%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
−220%
|
16−18
+220%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
−233%
|
10−11
+233%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 3−4
−233%
|
10−11
+233%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−233%
|
10−11
+233%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
This is how Quadro K500M and UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs compete in popular games:
- UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs is 300% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.24 | 4.40 |
| Recency | 1 June 2012 | 30 March 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
The UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K500M in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro K500M is a mobile workstation card while UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs 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.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
