Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs Quadro NVS 160M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro NVS 160M with Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, including specs and performance data.
Graphics G7 80EUs outperforms 160M by a whopping 1954% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1348 | 585 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 92 |
| Power efficiency | 2.24 | 19.73 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) |
| GPU code name | G98 | Tiger Lake Xe |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 August 2008 (17 years ago) | 15 August 2020 (5 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 | 8 | 80 |
| Core clock speed | 580 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1350 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 210 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 28 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.640 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.0232 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | no data |
| TMUs | 8 | no data |
| L2 Cache | 16 KB | 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).
| Interface | MXM-I | no 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 type | GDDR3 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 700 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 11.2 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | no data | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12_1 |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | no data |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | no data |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
| CUDA | 1.1 | - |
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 | 0−1 | 18 |
| 1440p | -0−1 | 9 |
| 4K | 0−1 | 14 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1300%
|
14
+1300%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−180%
|
14
+180%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1100%
|
12
+1100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−725%
|
30−35
+725%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−180%
|
14−16
+180%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−271%
|
24−27
+271%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−196%
|
75−80
+196%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−736%
|
110−120
+736%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−900%
|
10
+900%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−290%
|
39
+290%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−725%
|
30−35
+725%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−180%
|
14−16
+180%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−271%
|
24−27
+271%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−340%
|
22
+340%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−196%
|
75−80
+196%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−800%
|
9
+800%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−260%
|
36
+260%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−725%
|
30−35
+725%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−180%
|
14−16
+180%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−271%
|
24−27
+271%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−120%
|
11
+120%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−196%
|
75−80
+196%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−367%
|
14−16
+367%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 1−2
−5500%
|
55−60
+5500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−925%
|
40−45
+925%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−1600%
|
16−18
+1600%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 0−1 | 8−9 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−900%
|
10
+900%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 14−16 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−28.6%
|
18−20
+28.6%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−1750%
|
35−40
+1750%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−600%
|
7−8
+600%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 31
+0%
|
31
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 26
+0%
|
26
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24
+0%
|
24
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 20
+0%
|
20
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 21
+0%
|
21
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 23
+0%
|
23
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12
+0%
|
12
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 19
+0%
|
19
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 20
+0%
|
20
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14
+0%
|
14
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12
+0%
|
12
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 23
+0%
|
23
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18
+0%
|
18
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 6
+0%
|
6
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Valorant | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6
+0%
|
6
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12
+0%
|
12
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 16
+0%
|
16
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 5500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs performs better in 31 tests (48%)
- there's a draw in 33 tests (52%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.35 | 7.19 |
| Recency | 15 August 2008 | 15 August 2020 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 28 Watt |
NVS 160M has 133.3% lower power consumption.
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, on the other hand, has a 1954.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, and a 550% more advanced lithography process.
The Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 160M in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro NVS 160M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
