Iris Xe Graphics G7 vs Quadro M4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GRID M6-8Q GRID M60-1Q GRID M60-2Q GRID M60-4A GRID M60-8Q Quadro M3000 SE Quadro M4000 Quadro M5000 Quadro M5000 SE Tesla M6 Tesla M60
VS
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G4 Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs UHD Graphics Xe G1 UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M4000 with Iris Xe Graphics G7, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M4000
2015
8 GB GDDR5, 120 Watt
17.37
+69.1%

M4000 outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 by an impressive 69% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Quadro M4000 Quadro M4000
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking328449
Place by popularitynot in top-10017
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.38no data
Power efficiency9.93no data
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGM204Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date29 June 2015 (9 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$791 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores166496
Core clock speed773 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Wattno data
Texture fill rate80.39no data
Floating-point processing power2.573 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs104no data

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length241 mmno data
Width1" (2.5 cm)no data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5DDR4
Maximum RAM amount8 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1502 MHzno data
Memory bandwidthUp to 192 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 Connectors4x DisplayPortno data
Number of simultaneous displays4no data
Multi-display synchronizationQuadro Syncno data

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
High-Performance Video I/O6+no data
nView Desktop Management+no data
Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12DirectX 12_1
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.1.126-
CUDA5.2-

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 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Dota 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Dota 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 42 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 17.37 10.27
Recency 29 June 2015 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm

Quadro M4000 has a 69.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics G7, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro M4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M4000 is a workstation card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 is a notebook 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 M4000
Quadro M4000
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7
Iris Xe Graphics G7
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Quadro M4000 Quadro M4000
vs
RTX A500 RTX A500
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7
vs
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) Graphics 4 Cores iGPU (Arc)
Quadro M4000 Quadro M4000
vs
P106-100 P106 100
GeForce 930M 930M
vs
Go 7800 GTX Go 7800 GTX
TITAN V TITAN V
vs
Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB
RTX 2060 12 GB RTX 2060 12 GB
vs
Arc A570M Arc A570M
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
vs
R7 M350 R7 M350
HD Graphics 520 HD Graphics 520
vs
RX Vega 28 Mobile RX Vega 28 Mobile
Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Iris Xe Graphics 80EU
vs
Jetson Orin NX 8 GB Jetson Orin NX 8 GB
HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
vs
HD Graphics (Braswell) HD Graphics (Braswell)
GTX 1050 GTX 1050
vs
RX Vega 11 Embedded RX Vega 11 Embedded
R5 M330 R5 M330
vs
GT 710 OEM GT 710 OEM
PlayStation 4 GPU PlayStation 4 GPU
vs
Steam Deck OLED GPU Steam Deck OLED GPU

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.6 247 votes

Rate Quadro M4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 2683 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M4000 or Iris Xe Graphics G7, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.