Iris Plus Graphics 640 vs Quadro M620

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M620 with Iris Plus Graphics 640, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M620
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
7.03
+86%

M620 outperforms Iris Plus Graphics 640 by an impressive 86% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking554712
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency16.4417.71
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGM107Kaby Lake GT3e
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date11 January 2017 (8 years ago)3 January 2017 (8 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 cores512384
Core clock speed756 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed977 MHz1100 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm++
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate31.2652.80
Floating-point processing power1 TFLOPS0.8448 TFLOPS
ROPs166
TMUs3248

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
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)Ring Bus
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 typeGDDR5DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amount2 GB32 GB
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1253 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth80 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 outputsPortable Device Dependent
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 Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data
Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA5.0-

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.

Quadro M620 7.03
+86%
Iris Plus Graphics 640 3.78

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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 M620 2765
+85.7%
Iris Plus Graphics 640 1489

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.

Quadro M620 3801
+59.8%
Iris Plus Graphics 640 2379

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.

Quadro M620 3130
+125%
Iris Plus Graphics 640 1394

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.

Quadro M620 22120
+96.7%
Iris Plus Graphics 640 11248

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Quadro M620 862
+97.3%
Iris Plus Graphics 640 437

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 HD26
+23.8%
21
−23.8%
4K10
+100%
5−6
−100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+107%
14−16
−107%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+133%
9−10
−133%
Fortnite 40−45
+105%
20−22
−105%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+76.5%
16−18
−76.5%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+66.7%
14−16
−66.7%
Valorant 70−75
+40.4%
50−55
−40.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+107%
14−16
−107%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+66.7%
65−70
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Dota 2 50−55
+82.8%
29
−82.8%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+133%
9−10
−133%
Fortnite 40−45
+105%
20−22
−105%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+76.5%
16−18
−76.5%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+317%
6
−317%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+66.7%
14−16
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+72.7%
10−12
−72.7%
Valorant 70−75
+40.4%
50−55
−40.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+107%
14−16
−107%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Dota 2 50−55
+152%
21
−152%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+133%
9−10
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+76.5%
16−18
−76.5%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+66.7%
14−16
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+150%
4
−150%
Valorant 70−75
+40.4%
50−55
−40.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
+105%
20−22
−105%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
+92.6%
27−30
−92.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+44.4%
27−30
−44.4%
Valorant 75−80
+103%
35−40
−103%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Valorant 30−35
+88.9%
18−20
−88.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 24−27
+118%
10−12
−118%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how Quadro M620 and Iris Plus Graphics 640 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M620 is 24% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M620 is 100% faster in 4K

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

  • in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro M620 is 317% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro M620 is ahead in 60 tests (98%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.03 3.78
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 15 Watt

Quadro M620 has a 86% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Plus Graphics 640, on the other hand, has a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M620 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Plus Graphics 640 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M620 is a mobile workstation card while Iris Plus Graphics 640 is a mobile workstation 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 M620
Quadro M620
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640
Iris Plus Graphics 640

Other comparisons

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.


3.3 196 votes

Rate Quadro M620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 312 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 640 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M620 or Iris Plus Graphics 640, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.