Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs vs Quadro M4000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M4000M with Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs, including specs and performance data.

M4000M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
15.86
+67.8%

M4000M outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by an impressive 68% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking336461
Place by popularitynot in top-10076
Power efficiency11.0123.44
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGM204Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date18 August 2015 (9 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 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 cores1,28096
Core clock speed975 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1013 MHz1350 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate78.00no data
Floating-point processing power2.496 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs80no 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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1253 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth160 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 outputsno data
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 Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data
Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212_1
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
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. 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.

M4000M 15.86
+67.8%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 9.45

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

M4000M 10259
+57.4%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 6518

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

M4000M 7723
+50.2%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 5143

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

M4000M 49204
+82.6%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 26949

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

M4000M 56
+42.3%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 39

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

M4000M 89
+103%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 44

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

M4000M 110
+2953%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 4

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

M4000M 80
+107%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 39

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

M4000M 68
+744%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 8

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

M4000M 27
+137%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 12

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

M4000M 45
+149%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 18

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

M4000M 7
+1525%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 0

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 HD63
+142%
26
−142%
1440p24−27
+50%
16
−50%
4K20
+81.8%
11
−81.8%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+25%
20
−25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+63.6%
22
−63.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+23.8%
21
−23.8%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+79.3%
27−30
−79.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
−12.5%
36
+12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+56.3%
16
−56.3%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+72.7%
21−24
−72.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+69.2%
24−27
−69.2%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+63.5%
60−65
−63.5%
Hitman 3 30−35
+29.2%
24
−29.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
−53.1%
124
+53.1%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+57.1%
35
−57.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+159%
17
−159%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+67.7%
30−35
−67.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
−11.1%
90
+11.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+56.5%
21−24
−56.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+44.4%
18
−44.4%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+79.3%
27−30
−79.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+0%
32
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+92.3%
13
−92.3%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+72.7%
21−24
−72.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+69.2%
24−27
−69.2%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+63.5%
60−65
−63.5%
Hitman 3 30−35
+34.8%
23
−34.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
−38.3%
112
+38.3%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+96.4%
28
−96.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+69.2%
26
−69.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+73.3%
30
−73.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+46.2%
24−27
−46.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
−3.7%
84
+3.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+157%
14
−157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+85.7%
14−16
−85.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+39.1%
23
−39.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+127%
11
−127%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+72.7%
21−24
−72.7%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+63.5%
60−65
−63.5%
Hitman 3 30−35
+55%
20
−55%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+252%
23
−252%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+117%
24
−117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+171%
14
−171%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+32.8%
60−65
−32.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+214%
14
−214%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+72.2%
18−20
−72.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+78.6%
14−16
−78.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+28.6%
7
−28.6%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+72.7%
10−12
−72.7%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+107%
40−45
−107%
Hitman 3 18−20
+46.2%
12−14
−46.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+65%
20−22
−65%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+123%
12−14
−123%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
+57.9%
19
−57.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+63.3%
60−65
−63.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Hitman 3 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+108%
35−40
−108%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+25%
12
−25%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+45.5%
11
−45.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%

This is how M4000M and Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs compete in popular games:

  • M4000M is 142% faster in 1080p
  • M4000M is 50% faster in 1440p
  • M4000M is 82% faster in 4K

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

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the M4000M is 252% faster.
  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 53% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • M4000M is ahead in 66 tests (92%)
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is ahead in 5 tests (7%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.86 9.45
Recency 18 August 2015 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 28 Watt

M4000M has a 67.8% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 257.1% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M4000M is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M4000M is a mobile workstation card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 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.


NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
Quadro M4000M
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.1 144 votes

Rate Quadro M4000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 952 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 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.