Iris Pro Graphics P580 vs Quadro M2200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M2200 with Iris Pro Graphics P580, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M2200
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
11.03
+110%

M2200 outperforms Iris Pro Graphics P580 by a whopping 110% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking432627
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.7924.01
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)
GPU code nameGM206Skylake GT4e
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date11 January 2017 (8 years ago)1 September 2015 (9 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 cores1024576
Core clock speed695 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speed1036 MHz1050 MHz
Number of transistors2,940 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm+
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate66.3075.60
Floating-point processing power2.122 TFLOPS1.21 TFLOPS
ROPs329
TMUs6472

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)Ring Bus
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amount4 GB64 GB
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1377 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth88 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data
Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA5.2-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

Quadro M2200 11.03
+110%
Iris Pro Graphics P580 5.24

  • Passmark

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.

Quadro M2200 4249
+110%
Iris Pro Graphics P580 2020

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 HD43
+139%
18−21
−139%
4K14
+133%
6−7
−133%

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
Atomic Heart 24−27
+117%
12−14
−117%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+72.7%
10−12
−72.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Atomic Heart 24−27
+117%
12−14
−117%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+125%
20−22
−125%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+72.7%
10−12
−72.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+150%
14−16
−150%
Fortnite 60−65
+110%
27−30
−110%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+95.7%
21−24
−95.7%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+145%
10−12
−145%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+94.7%
18−20
−94.7%
Valorant 95−100
+57.4%
60−65
−57.4%
Atomic Heart 24−27
+117%
12−14
−117%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+125%
20−22
−125%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+72.7%
10−12
−72.7%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160
+81.2%
85−90
−81.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Dota 2 70−75
+73.8%
40−45
−73.8%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+150%
14−16
−150%
Fortnite 60−65
+110%
27−30
−110%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+95.7%
21−24
−95.7%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+145%
10−12
−145%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+129%
16−18
−129%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+133%
9−10
−133%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+94.7%
18−20
−94.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 37
+164%
14−16
−164%
Valorant 95−100
+57.4%
60−65
−57.4%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+125%
20−22
−125%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+72.7%
10−12
−72.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Dota 2 70−75
+73.8%
40−45
−73.8%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+150%
14−16
−150%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+95.7%
21−24
−95.7%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+145%
10−12
−145%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+94.7%
18−20
−94.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Valorant 95−100
+57.4%
60−65
−57.4%
Fortnite 60−65
+110%
27−30
−110%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+108%
35−40
−108%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+52.9%
30−35
−52.9%
Valorant 110−120
+107%
55−60
−107%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+420%
5−6
−420%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+144%
9−10
−144%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+108%
12−14
−108%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Fortnite 21−24
+120%
10−11
−120%
Atomic Heart 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Valorant 55−60
+120%
24−27
−120%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Dota 2 35−40
+124%
16−18
−124%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Fortnite 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how Quadro M2200 and Iris Pro Graphics P580 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M2200 is 139% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M2200 is 133% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro M2200 is 1200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro M2200 is ahead in 63 tests (98%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.03 5.24
Recency 11 January 2017 1 September 2015
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 64 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 15 Watt

Quadro M2200 has a 110.5% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

Iris Pro Graphics P580, on the other hand, has a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 266.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M2200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Pro Graphics P580 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M2200 is a mobile workstation card while Iris Pro Graphics P580 is a mobile workstation one.

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.


NVIDIA Quadro M2200
Quadro M2200
Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580
Iris Pro Graphics P580

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.


3.7
380 votes

Rate Quadro M2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2
5 votes

Rate Iris Pro Graphics P580 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M2200 or Iris Pro Graphics P580, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.