Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs vs Quadro M5500

Place in the ranking	271	478
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	9.47	22.77
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code name	GM204	Tiger Lake Xe
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	8 April 2016 (8 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 cores	2048	96
Core clock speed	1140 MHz	400 MHz
Boost clock speed	1165 MHz	1350 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	28 Watt
Texture fill rate	149.1	no data
Floating-point processing power	4.772 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	64	no data
TMUs	128	no 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 size	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	no data
Memory bus width	256 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1753 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	211 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
Display Port	1.2	no data
G-SYNC support	+	-

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
VR Ready	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data
Quick Sync	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12_1
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.5	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	+	-
CUDA	+	-

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	60−65 +122%	27 −122%
1440p	35−40 +119%	16 −119%
4K	24−27 +118%	11 −118%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +147%	15 −147%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +105%	20 −105%
Elden Ring	65−70 +214%	21 −214%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +117%	30−33 −117%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +185%	13 −185%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +193%	14 −193%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 +129%	38 −129%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +89.7%	29 −89.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 +176%	17 −176%
Valorant	80−85 +219%	26 −219%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +117%	30−33 −117%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +208%	12 −208%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +273%	11 −273%
Dota 2	70−75 +157%	28 −157%
Elden Ring	65−70 +200%	22 −200%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +119%	31 −119%
Fortnite	100−110 +100%	50−55 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 +190%	30 −190%
Grand Theft Auto V	70−75 +324%	17 −324%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +189%	19 −189%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140 +90.3%	70−75 −90.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 +488%	8 −488%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 +132%	27−30 −132%
Valorant	80−85 +144%	30−35 −144%
World of Tanks	230−240 +145%	96 −145%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +117%	30−33 −117%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +106%	18−20 −106%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +310%	10 −310%
Dota 2	70−75 +53.2%	47 −53.2%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +100%	34 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 +263%	24 −263%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140 +90.3%	70−75 −90.3%
Valorant	80−85 +261%	23 −261%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	30−35 +371%	7 −371%
Elden Ring	30−35 +127%	15 −127%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 +371%	7 −371%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +282%	45−50 −282%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +138%	8−9 −138%
World of Tanks	130−140 +107%	65−70 −107%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 +147%	16−18 −147%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +70%	10−11 −70%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +433%	3 −433%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +180%	20−22 −180%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +179%	19 −179%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +176%	16−18 −176%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +155%	10−12 −155%
Valorant	50−55 +130%	21−24 −130%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +467%	3−4 −467%
Dota 2	35−40 +338%	8 −338%
Elden Ring	14−16 +114%	7 −114%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 +338%	8 −338%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +200%	5−6 −200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 +130%	27−30 −130%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +117%	6−7 −117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 +338%	8 −338%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +163%	8−9 −163%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +467%	3−4 −467%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Dota 2	35−40 +75%	20 −75%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +145%	10−12 −145%
Fortnite	24−27 +150%	10−11 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +182%	11 −182%
Valorant	24−27 +178%	9−10 −178%

This is how Quadro M5500 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs compete in popular games:

Quadro M5500 is 122% faster in 1080p
Quadro M5500 is 119% faster in 1440p
Quadro M5500 is 118% faster in 4K

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

in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro M5500 is 488% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, Quadro M5500 surpassed Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	20.59	9.24
Recency	8 April 2016	15 August 2020
Chip lithography	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	28 Watt

Quadro M5500 has a 122.8% 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 435.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M5500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M5500 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.