Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs vs Quadro M6000 24 GB

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Quadro M2000 Quadro M3000 SE Quadro M4000 Quadro M5000 Quadro M5000 SE Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000 24 GB
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
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 M6000 24 GB with Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs, including specs and performance data.

M6000 24 GB
2016
24 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
30.71
+235%

M6000 24 GB outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by a whopping 235% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

M6000 24 GB M6000 24 GB
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking190484
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.09no data
Power efficiency8.4322.49
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGM200Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date5 March 2016 (8 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,999 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 cores307296
Core clock speed988 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1114 MHz1350 MHz
Number of transistors8,000 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate285.2no data
Floating-point processing power6.844 TFLOPSno data
ROPs96no data
TMUs256no 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
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno 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 amount24 GBno data
Memory bus width384 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1653 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth317.4 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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x DisplayPortno data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12_1
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA5.2-

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 HD90−95
+233%
27
−233%
1440p50−55
+213%
16
−213%
4K40−45
+233%
12
−233%

Cost per frame, $

1080p55.54no data
1440p99.98no data
4K124.98no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 26
+0%
26
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 15
+0%
15
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 19
+0%
19
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 18
+0%
18
+0%
Battlefield 5 41
+0%
41
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 13
+0%
13
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
+0%
16
+0%
Far Cry 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Fortnite 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 22
+0%
22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 124
+0%
124
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12
+0%
12
+0%
Battlefield 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12
+0%
12
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 96
+0%
96
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 13
+0%
13
+0%
Dota 2 51
+0%
51
+0%
Far Cry 5 25
+0%
25
+0%
Fortnite 21
+0%
21
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 17
+0%
17
+0%
Metro Exodus 15
+0%
15
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
+0%
30
+0%
Valorant 112
+0%
112
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+0%
11
+0%
Dota 2 47
+0%
47
+0%
Far Cry 5 23
+0%
23
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 22
+0%
22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+0%
14
+0%
Valorant 23
+0%
23
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 15
+0%
15
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 7
+0%
7
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
+0%
7
+0%
Far Cry 5 16
+0%
16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 8
+0%
8
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+0%
12
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 20
+0%
20
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

This is how M6000 24 GB and Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs compete in popular games:

  • M6000 24 GB is 233% faster in 1080p
  • M6000 24 GB is 213% faster in 1440p
  • M6000 24 GB is 233% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 30.71 9.18
Recency 5 March 2016 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 28 Watt

M6000 24 GB has a 234.5% 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 792.9% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M6000 24 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M6000 24 GB is a workstation card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 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 M6000 24 GB
Quadro M6000 24 GB
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

M6000 24 GB Quadro M6000 24 GB
vs
Pro 5700 Radeon Pro 5700
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
vs
HD 7970M Radeon HD 7970M
M6000 24 GB Quadro M6000 24 GB
vs
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
Quadro M2000 M2000
vs
FX 1700 Mac Edition FX 1700 Mac Edition
Quadro M2000 M2000
vs
Pro WX 7130 Mobile Pro WX 7130 Mobile
Quadro M2000 M2000
vs
Pro 5700 Pro 5700
M6000 24 GB M6000 24 GB
vs
RTX 6000 Passive RTX 6000 Passive
M6000 24 GB M6000 24 GB
vs
Pro 5500 XT Pro 5500 XT
M6000 24 GB M6000 24 GB
vs
T600 Mobile T600 Mobile
Tesla M4 Tesla M4
vs
Apple M2 Pro 19-Core GPU M2 Pro 19-Core GPU
Quadro M4000 M4000
vs
HD 6950 HD 6950
Quadro M4000 M4000
vs
9600 GT 9600 GT
Quadro M4000 M4000
vs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs

Community ratings

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

4.4 17 votes

Rate Quadro M6000 24 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 1005 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M6000 24 GB or Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.