Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs vs Quadro M5500

Place in the ranking	268	468
Place by popularity	not in top-100	88
Power efficiency	9.38	23.18
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	55−60 +112%	26 −112%
1440p	30−35 +100%	15 −100%
4K	21−24 +110%	10 −110%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

30−35
+65%

−65%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 +109%	22 −109%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +61.9%	21 −61.9%
Battlefield 5	65−70 +131%	27−30 −131%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	40−45 +16.7%	36 −16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +106%	16 −106%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +118%	21−24 −118%
Far Cry New Dawn	55−60 +112%	24−27 −112%
Forza Horizon 4	120−130 +100%	60−65 −100%
Hitman 3	40−45 +66.7%	24 −66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	95−100 −26.5%	124 +26.5%
Metro Exodus	70−75 +103%	35 −103%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 +224%	17 −224%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	65−70 +119%	30−35 −119%
Watch Dogs: Legion	90−95 +3.3%	90 −3.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 +100%	21−24 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +88.9%	18 −88.9%
Battlefield 5	65−70 +131%	27−30 −131%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	40−45 +31.3%	32 −31.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +154%	13 −154%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +118%	21−24 −118%
Far Cry New Dawn	55−60 +112%	24−27 −112%
Forza Horizon 4	120−130 +100%	60−65 −100%
Hitman 3	40−45 +73.9%	23 −73.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	95−100 −14.3%	112 +14.3%
Metro Exodus	70−75 +154%	28 −154%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 +112%	26 −112%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	65−70 +127%	30 −127%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +76.9%	24−27 −76.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	90−95 +10.7%	84 −10.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 +229%	14 −229%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +143%	14−16 −143%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	40−45 +82.6%	23 −82.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +200%	11 −200%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +118%	21−24 −118%
Forza Horizon 4	120−130 +100%	60−65 −100%
Hitman 3	40−45 +100%	20 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	95−100 +326%	23 −326%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	65−70 +183%	24 −183%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +229%	14 −229%
Watch Dogs: Legion	90−95 +52.5%	60−65 −52.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

55−60
+293%

−293%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +117%	18−20 −117%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−35 +121%	14−16 −121%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +133%	9−10 −133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18−20 +280%	5−6 −280%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +156%	9−10 −156%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +71.4%	7 −71.4%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +118%	10−12 −118%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +180%	40−45 −180%
Hitman 3	24−27 +84.6%	12−14 −84.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +110%	20−22 −110%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +192%	12−14 −192%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40−45 +121%	19 −121%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +167%	9−10 −167%
Watch Dogs: Legion	120−130 +100%	60−65 −100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30−35
+113%

16−18

−113%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	20−22 +122%	9−10 −122%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 +129%	7−8 −129%
Hitman 3	16−18 +220%	5−6 −220%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +172%	35−40 −172%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +214%	7−8 −214%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +75%	12 −75%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +120%	5−6 −120%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +133%	12−14 −133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +109%	11 −109%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20
+100%

9−10

−100%

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

Quadro M5500 is 112% faster in 1080p
Quadro M5500 is 100% faster in 1440p
Quadro M5500 is 110% 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 Quadro M5500 is 326% faster.
in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 27% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Quadro M5500 is ahead in 70 tests (97%)
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is ahead in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	20.54	9.47
Recency	8 April 2016	15 August 2020
Chip lithography	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	28 Watt

Quadro M5500 has a 116.9% 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.