Iris Xe Graphics G7 vs Quadro P6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
P102-100 P104-100 P106-090 P106-100 P400 P2000 P2200 P4000 P5000 Tesla P4 Tesla P40 Tesla P100 PCIe 16 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 G1 Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G4 Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) Xe 750 32EUs Xe G1 Xe G4 48EUs

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P6000 with Iris Xe Graphics G7, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P6000
2016
24 GB 384-bit, 250 Watt
35.09
+289%

P6000 outperforms Graphics G7 by a whopping 289% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
Quadro P6000 Quadro P6000
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking143494
Place by popularitynot in top-10015
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.62no data
Power efficiency11.37no data
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGP102Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date1 October 2016 (9 years ago)15 August 2020 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,999 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores384096
Core clock speed1506 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1645 MHzno data
Number of transistors11,800 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology16 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Wattno data
Texture fill rate394.8no data
Floating-point processing power12.63 TFLOPSno data
ROPs96no data
TMUs240no data
L1 Cache1.4 MBno data
L2 Cache3 MBno 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" (5.1 cm)no data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 8-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 type384 BitDDR4
Maximum RAM amount24 GBno data
Memory bus width384 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1127 MHzno data
Memory bandwidthUp to 432 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno data+

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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x DisplayPortno data
Number of simultaneous displays4no data
Multi-display synchronizationQuadro Sync IIno data

Supported technologies

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

ECC (Error Correcting Code)+no data
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
High-Performance Video I/O6+no data
nView Desktop Management+no data
Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12DirectX 12_1
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131-
CUDA6.1-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Dota 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Dota 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 42 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 35.09 9.02
Recency 1 October 2016 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 16 nm 10 nm

Quadro P6000 has a 289% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics G7, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 60% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P6000 is a workstation graphics card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 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 P6000
Quadro P6000
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7
Iris Xe Graphics G7
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

Quadro P6000 Quadro P6000
vs
RTX 5000 Quadro RTX 5000
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7
vs
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) Graphics 4 Cores iGPU (Arc)
Quadro P6000 Quadro P6000
vs
Pro Vega II Radeon Pro Vega II
M3000 SE Quadro M3000 SE
vs
RTX 5090 DD GeForce RTX 5090 DD
Quadro P6000 Quadro P6000
vs
R7 250 Radeon R7 250
Quadro P6000 Quadro P6000
vs
9650M GS GeForce 9650M GS
Quadro P6000 Quadro P6000
vs
GTX 675MX Mac Edition GeForce GTX 675MX Mac Edition
Quadro P6000 Quadro P6000
vs
GeForce 9200M GeForce 9200M
Tesla P4 Tesla P4
vs
UHD Graphics 730 UHD Graphics 730
Tesla P40 Tesla P40
vs
GTX 1060 6 GB GP104 GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB GP104
Tesla P40 Tesla P40
vs
T1000 Max-Q Quadro T1000 Max-Q
Tesla P40 Tesla P40
vs
CMP 170HX 8 GB CMP 170HX 8 GB
Tesla P40 Tesla P40
vs
RX 7900 GRE Radeon RX 7900 GRE

Community ratings

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

3.7 119 votes

Rate Quadro P6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 3056 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P6000 or Iris Xe Graphics G7, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.