Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs Quadro P5200

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P5200 with Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P5200
2018
16 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
31.35
+314%

P5200 outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs by a whopping 314% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking185538
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency21.5318.59
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGP104Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date21 February 2018 (7 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 cores256080
Core clock speed1556 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1746 MHz1350 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology16 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate279.4no data
Floating-point processing power8.94 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs160no 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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)no data
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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount16 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1800 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth230.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
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
Vulkan1.2.131-
CUDA6.1-

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 P5200 31.35
+314%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 7.58

  • Other tests
    • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
    • 3DMark Vantage Performance
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
    • 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
    • 3DMark Time Spy Graphics

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 P5200 25100
+371%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 5332

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Quadro P5200 65844
+203%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 21729

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 P5200 18467
+361%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 4010

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 P5200 106328
+385%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 21931

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Quadro P5200 6422
+444%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 1180

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 HD120
+500%
20
−500%
1440p40−45
+300%
10
−300%
4K48
+243%
14
−243%

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
Atomic Heart 80−85
+265%
23
−265%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+455%
11
−455%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+364%
14
−364%
Atomic Heart 80−85
+425%
16
−425%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+323%
26
−323%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+578%
9
−578%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+442%
12
−442%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+380%
20
−380%
Fortnite 130−140
+216%
40−45
−216%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+259%
30−35
−259%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+507%
14
−507%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+350%
24−27
−350%
Valorant 180−190
+146%
75−80
−146%
Atomic Heart 80−85
+600%
12
−600%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+378%
23
−378%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+510%
10
−510%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+137%
110−120
−137%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+550%
10
−550%
Dota 2 130−140
+241%
39
−241%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+405%
19
−405%
Fortnite 130−140
+216%
40−45
−216%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+259%
30−35
−259%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+400%
16−18
−400%
Grand Theft Auto V 100−110
+700%
13
−700%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+458%
12
−458%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+350%
24−27
−350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 118
+436%
22
−436%
Valorant 180−190
+146%
75−80
−146%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+378%
23
−378%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+1120%
5
−1120%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+622%
9
−622%
Dota 2 130−140
+269%
36
−269%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+433%
18
−433%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+259%
30−35
−259%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+844%
9
−844%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+350%
24−27
−350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65
+491%
11
−491%
Valorant 180−190
+146%
75−80
−146%
Fortnite 130−140
+216%
40−45
−216%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+333%
6−7
−333%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 200−210
+269%
55−60
−269%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+833%
6
−833%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+486%
7−8
−486%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+338%
40−45
−338%
Valorant 220−230
+178%
80−85
−178%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+464%
14−16
−464%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+417%
6
−417%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+475%
12
−475%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+359%
16−18
−359%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+333%
12−14
−333%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+410%
10
−410%
Fortnite 70−75
+421%
14−16
−421%
Atomic Heart 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+222%
18−20
−222%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+667%
6−7
−667%
Valorant 170−180
+386%
35−40
−386%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+557%
7−8
−557%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Dota 2 90−95
+469%
16
−469%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+400%
7−8
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+373%
10−12
−373%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+480%
5−6
−480%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+386%
7−8
−386%
Fortnite 30−35
+386%
7−8
−386%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

This is how Quadro P5200 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P5200 is 500% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P5200 is 300% faster in 1440p
  • Quadro P5200 is 243% faster in 4K

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro P5200 is 1200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro P5200 is ahead in 66 tests (99%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 31.35 7.58
Recency 21 February 2018 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 16 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 28 Watt

Quadro P5200 has a 313.6% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 60% more advanced lithography process, and 257.1% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P5200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P5200 is a mobile workstation card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 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 P5200
Quadro P5200
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs

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.


4.1
100 votes

Rate Quadro P5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7
947 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P5200 or Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.