Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs Quadro NVS 160M

Place in the ranking	1289	528
Place by popularity	not in top-100	65
Power efficiency	2.00	18.58
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 (16 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	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

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

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

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API compatibility

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	19
1440p	-0−1	10
4K	0−1	17

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

2−3

−600%

14
+600%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −533%	18−20 +533%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −650%	14−16 +650%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −550%	13 +550%
Hitman 3	4−5 −300%	16 +300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −438%	40−45 +438%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −525%	24−27 +525%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −121%	62 +121%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −533%	18−20 +533%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −650%	14−16 +650%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −400%	10 +400%
Hitman 3	4−5 −275%	15 +275%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −438%	40−45 +438%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −500%	24 +500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −144%	21−24 +144%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −75%	49 +75%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −533%	18−20 +533%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −650%	14−16 +650%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −300%	8 +300%
Hitman 3	4−5 −200%	12 +200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −100%	16 +100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −400%	20 +400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −22.2%	11 +22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −96.4%	55−60 +96.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	3−4
Hitman 3	6−7 −83.3%	10−12 +83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2−3 −700%	16−18 +700%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−550%

12−14
+550%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	3−4

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−250%

7−8
+250%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	19 +0%	19 +0%
Battlefield 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Metro Exodus	38 +0%	38 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16 +0%	16 +0%
Battlefield 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Metro Exodus	27 +0%	27 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

20−22

+0%

20−22

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Metro Exodus	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16 +0%	16 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10 +0%	10 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Hitman 3	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

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

in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is ahead in 29 tests (41%)
there's a draw in 41 test (59%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.35	7.58
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 2065.7% 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 card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 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.