Iris Xe MAX Graphics vs Quadro M5000

Place in performance ranking	223	621
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	3.12	no data
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2015−2019)	Gen. 12 Xe (2020)
GPU code name	GM204	iDG1LPDEV
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	29 June 2015 (9 years ago)	31 October 2020 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$2,856.99	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	2048	96
Core clock speed	861 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1038 MHz	1650 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	25 Watt
Texture fill rate	132.9	79.20
Floating-point performance	4.252 gflops	2.534 gflops

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2" (5.1 cm)	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1 x 6-pin	no 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 type	256 Bit	LPDDR4x
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	6612 MHz	4266 MHz
Memory bandwidth	Up to 211 GB/s	68.26 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

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	1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort	No outputs
Number of simultaneous displays	4	no data
Multi-display synchronization	Quadro Sync	no data

Supported technologies

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

ECC (Error Correcting Code)	+	no data
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
High-Performance Video I/O6	+	no data
nView Desktop Management	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.4
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.2
CUDA	5.2	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

Quadro M5000 24.38
+377%

Iris Xe MAX Graphics 5.11

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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 M5000 9403
+377%

Iris Xe MAX Graphics 1971

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	120−130 +344%	27 −344%
1440p	95−100 +375%	20 −375%
4K	75−80 +369%	16 −369%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

18−20

+0%

18−20

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	19 +0%	19 +0%
Battlefield 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Hitman 3	24 +0%	24 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Metro Exodus	57 +0%	57 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	33 +0%	33 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6 +0%	6 +0%
Battlefield 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Hitman 3	23 +0%	23 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Metro Exodus	43 +0%	43 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	33 +0%	33 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Hitman 3	21 +0%	21 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	26 +0%	26 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	29 +0%	29 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18 +0%	18 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Hitman 3	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	20 +0%	20 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

+0%

18−20

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	11 +0%	11 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	11 +0%	11 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12

+0%

10−12

+0%

This is how Quadro M5000 and Iris Xe MAX Graphics compete in popular games:

Quadro M5000 is 344% faster in 1080p
Quadro M5000 is 375% faster in 1440p
Quadro M5000 is 369% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	24.38	5.11
Recency	29 June 2015	31 October 2020
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	25 Watt