Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 and the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 represent two fundamentally different approaches to graphics processing: a dedicated, discrete add-in card versus an integrated processor graphics solution. The benchmark data shows a decisive performance gulf between them, with the GTX 1650 winning both head-to-head tests by substantial margins. This analysis breaks down those results, the architectural differences that cause them, and what they mean for potential use cases.

Where Each One Wins

The data is unambiguous: the GTX 1650 wins every single benchmark where both products have recorded scores. In the two available head-to-head tests, the GTX 1650 delivers a 226.2% higher score in Geekbench OpenCL and a 528.4% higher score in Geekbench Vulkan compared to the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580. The wins tally is 2 for the GTX 1650 and 0 for the Intel part.

The GTX 1650 demonstrates its superiority most dramatically in the Vulkan test, where its score of 33042 dwarfs the Intel’s 5258. This suggests the NVIDIA architecture is particularly well-suited to modern, low-level graphics APIs. The OpenCL gap is also enormous, with the GTX 1650 scoring 29629 against the Intel’s 9082, indicating a massive advantage in general-purpose compute workloads as well.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 has no benchmark wins to its name in this comparison. Its strengths, if any, do not manifest in the recorded performance metrics. The data suggests that for any task measured by these benchmarks, the GTX 1650 is the superior choice. The Intel’s only potential advantage is qualitative, in that it is an integrated processor with a 15 W TDP, which consumes far less power than the GTX 1650’s 75 W, but this is not reflected in any performance score.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on completely different foundations. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 uses the TU117 chip based on the Turing architecture, manufactured on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It packs 4,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.5 million per square millimeter. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580, by contrast, uses a Skylake GT4e chip based on Intel’s Generation 9.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm+ process at Intel. Its transistor count and die size are not listed, but its process node is less dense.

The compute configurations differ significantly. The GTX 1650 has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Intel P580 has 576 shading units, 72 TMUs, but only 9 ROPs. This unusual combination gives the Intel part a higher texture rate relative to its pixel rate, but the GTX 1650 wins outright on raw throughput: its pixel rate is 53.28 GPixel/s versus 9.000 GPixel/s for the Intel, and its texture rate is 93.24 GTexel/s versus 72.00 GTexel/s. The GTX 1650 also delivers 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel manages only 1,152.0 GFLOPS.

Memory is another major divider. The GTX 1650 features 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel P580 uses System Shared memory, with its size, type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. This means the Intel GPU must contend with the system’s main memory for bandwidth, a significant bottleneck that the discrete card avoids. Clock speeds also tell a story: the GTX 1650 has a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost of 1665 MHz, while the Intel runs at a 350 MHz base and 1000 MHz boost, far lower frequencies partly due to its integrated nature and 15 W power envelope.

The Verdict

For users who need dedicated graphics performance, the choice is clear. The GTX 1650 offers more than triple the average benchmark score (7472 for the GTX 1650 versus 7170 for the Intel P580) and dominates in both compute and rendering tests. Its 40th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it slightly above the Intel’s 39th percentile, and its nearest rivals include the Intel Arc A310, which it trails by just 1%, and the AMD Radeon R7 350, which it leads by 0.6%. The Intel P580’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE and GTX 970, with deltas of 0% and 0.2% respectively, indicating it sits in a much older performance tier.

The GTX 1650 is the only choice for discrete gaming or compute tasks. Its 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth provide a stable foundation for modern workloads. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580, with its system shared memory and 9 ROPs, is fundamentally limited to basic display output and light acceleration. The data shows the GTX 1650 is over 3 times faster in OpenCL and over 6 times faster in Vulkan, making it the only viable option for any performance-sensitive application. The Intel part’s only appeal is its integration into a CPU package, but that is a system design consideration, not a performance one.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 has an average score of 7170.

Q: How much faster is the GTX 1650 in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The GTX 1650 scores 33042 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 528.4% higher than the Intel P580’s score of 5258.

Q: What are the memory configurations of these two GPUs?

A: The GTX 1650 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 128.1 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel P580 uses System Shared memory, with its size and bandwidth being system dependent.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two products?

A: The GTX 1650 has a TDP of 75 W, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 has a TDP of 15 W.

Q: How do their pixel rates compare?

A: The GTX 1650 has a pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s, which is significantly higher than the Intel P580’s 9.000 GPixel/s.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The GTX 1650 has 896 shading units, while the Intel P580 has 576 shading units.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded head-to-head tests show a complete dominance by the GTX 1650. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1650 scores 29629, while the Intel P580 scores 9082. This results in a delta of 226.2% in favor of the NVIDIA card. This test measures general-purpose compute performance, and the result indicates that the GTX 1650’s dedicated hardware and higher FP32 throughput (2.984 TFLOPS versus 1,152.0 GFLOPS) translate directly into a massive compute advantage.

The Geekbench Vulkan test reveals an even wider gap. The GTX 1650 scores 33042, while the Intel P580 scores just 5258. The delta here is 528.4%, the largest margin in either test. Vulkan is a low-overhead, modern graphics API, and the GTX 1650’s Turing architecture appears to handle it far more efficiently than Intel’s Generation 9.0 architecture. This result suggests that for any modern gaming or graphics workload using Vulkan, the GTX 1650 would deliver over six times the performance of the Intel integrated solution.

The average benchmark scores reflect this pattern, albeit at a smaller scale. The GTX 1650’s average of 7472 is 302 points higher than the Intel’s 7170. This places the GTX 1650 in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, just above the Intel’s 39th percentile. The nearest rival to the GTX 1650 is the Intel Arc A310, which scores 7550 and is 1% faster, while the closest competitor to the Intel P580 is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE, which scores 7171, a difference of 0%. These results confirm that while the Intel part is not at the absolute bottom of the performance stack, it is in a completely different league from the GTX 1650. All available data points to the same conclusion: the GTX 1650 is the superior performer by a wide margin.