Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M Comparison

Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M are two end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from different eras, targeting distinct segments of the laptop market. The data shows a clear overall winner in raw compute benchmarks, but the two parts have fundamentally different architectural philosophies and memory configurations that shape their suitability for specific workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it produces a decisive result. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 scores 9,082 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M scores 6,946 points. This gives Intel a 30.8% advantage in this compute-oriented workload. That is a substantial margin, indicating that the integrated Intel solution delivers roughly a third more raw parallel compute throughput than the dedicated NVIDIA part.

Looking at the broader context, the P580’s average benchmark score of 7,170 places it in the 39th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE with an average score of 7,171 (a 0% delta) and the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile at 7,203 (a -0.5% delta). The GTX 675M, with an average score of 6,946, also sits at the 39th percentile, but its nearest rivals are notably weaker: the AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6,975 (-0.4% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M scores 7,023 (-1.1% delta). While both GPUs occupy the same percentile rank, the P580’s raw score is higher, and it is competitive with a much stronger class of discrete GPUs than the GTX 675M.

The OpenCL result is particularly telling because it measures general-purpose compute, not just graphics rendering. A 30.8% lead in this test suggests that the P580 is significantly better at tasks like physics simulations, video encoding, and other data-parallel workloads. The GTX 675M cannot match this performance in compute, even though it has a dedicated memory bus and higher pixel throughput.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is enormous, reflecting their five-generation separation in release timing. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 is built on the Skylake GT4e chip using Intel’s Generation 9.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm+ process at Intel’s own foundry. In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M uses the GF114 chip with the Fermi 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. This process difference alone explains much of the performance and efficiency gap: the Intel part packs its logic into a much smaller and more power-efficient transistor geometry.

The GTX 675M does have some physical advantages. It is built from 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, with a transistor density of 5.9M per mm². The P580 does not have listed transistor or die size data, but its 14 nm+ process implies a much denser design. The GTX 675M also features a dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory pool with a 256-bit bus and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the P580 relies on System Shared memory with bandwidth described as System Dependent. This means the GTX 675M has guaranteed fast, dedicated memory for textures and framebuffers, whereas the P580’s memory performance is entirely contingent on the laptop’s system RAM and bus architecture.

In terms of compute resources, the P580 has 576 shading units, 72 texture mapping units (TMUs), and just 9 raster output units (ROPs). The GTX 675M has 384 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The P580’s higher shading unit count and TMU count give it a theoretical fillrate advantage in texture-heavy workloads: 72.00 GTexel/s versus 39.68 GTexel/s for the GTX 675M. However, the GTX 675M counters with a higher pixel rate of 9.920 GPixel/s versus 9.000 GPixel/s for the P580, thanks to its larger ROP count. Floating-point performance also favors Intel: the P580 delivers 1,152.0 GFLOPS FP32 and 2.304 TFLOPS FP16 (with a 2:1 ratio), while the GTX 675M provides 952.3 GFLOPS FP32 and has no listed FP16 capability.

API support is another differentiator. The P580 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, making it fully modern in terms of software compatibility. The GTX 675M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support listed. This gives the P580 a significant edge in modern games and applications that leverage Vulkan or newer DirectX 12 features.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 has an average benchmark score of 7,170, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M has an average score of 6,946.

Q: How much faster is the P580 in OpenCL?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the P580 scores 9,082 versus 6,946 for the GTX 675M, representing a 30.8% advantage for Intel.

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

A: The GTX 675M has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The P580 uses System Shared memory with a System Shared bus width and System Dependent bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: Both support DirectX 12, but the P580 supports version 12_1 while the GTX 675M supports 11_0. The P580 also supports Vulkan 1.3, which the GTX 675M does not.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fillrate?

A: The GTX 675M has a higher pixel rate at 9.920 GPixel/s compared to the P580’s 9.000 GPixel/s, despite having fewer shading units.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No, both are listed as end-of-life products. The P580 was released in August 2015, and the GTX 675M was released in March 2012.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The process node is a major differentiator: Intel uses 14 nm+ while NVIDIA uses 40 nm, with different foundries (Intel vs TSMC). The GTX 675M has documented transistor count (1,950 million) and die size (332 mm²), while the P580 has no such data listed. Clock speeds also differ fundamentally: the P580 has a 350 MHz base clock and a 1000 MHz boost clock, whereas the GTX 675M has no listed base or boost clocks, only a memory clock of 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective). Memory is another clear divergence: the P580 uses System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth, while the GTX 675M uses 2 GB GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute unit counts differ as well: the P580 has 576 shading units, 72 TMUs, and 9 ROPs, while the GTX 675M has 384 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The P580 has higher texture rate (72.00 GTexel/s vs 39.68 GTexel/s) and FP32 throughput (1,152.0 GFLOPS vs 952.3 GFLOPS), but the GTX 675M has a higher pixel rate (9.920 GPixel/s vs 9.000 GPixel/s). The P580 also offers FP16 performance at 2.304 TFLOPS, which the GTX 675M lacks entirely.

Power and physical specifications are starkly different. The P580 has a TDP of 15 W and uses an IGP slot width, while the GTX 675M has a 100 W TDP and uses an MXM Module form factor. The GTX 675M lists no power connectors, while the P580 has none either. The bus interface differs: the P580 uses Ring Bus, while the GTX 675M uses MXM-B (3.0). Display outputs are motherboard dependent for the P580 and portable device dependent for the GTX 675M. API support diverges on Vulkan (present on P580, absent on GTX 675M) and DirectX version (12_1 vs 11_0). Finally, the GTX 675M has documented predecessor (GeForce 500M) and successor (GeForce 700M) products, while the P580 has no such listings.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 is the clear winner in compute-heavy workloads. Its 30.8% OpenCL lead demonstrates superior parallel processing capability, and its higher FP32 throughput (1,152.0 GFLOPS) and FP16 support make it better suited for machine learning inference, video processing, and scientific compute tasks. The Vulkan 1.3 support also gives it a modern API advantage, making it more compatible with current-generation games and applications that have moved beyond older graphics APIs. Its 15 W TDP means it is far more power-efficient, making it ideal for thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermals are paramount.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M wins in scenarios where dedicated memory bandwidth and rasterization throughput matter. Its 96.00 GB/s dedicated GDDR5 bandwidth is not dependent on system RAM performance, which can be a bottleneck for the P580. The GTX 675M’s higher pixel rate (9.920 GPixel/s) and larger ROP count (32 vs 9) make it more capable at traditional rasterization-heavy rendering, such as high-resolution gaming with anti-aliasing and complex pixel shaders. Its MXM form factor also suggests it was designed for larger, gaming-oriented laptops where 100 W power draw is acceptable.

For legacy software compatibility, the GTX 675M has an advantage in that it was released in March 2012 with the GeForce 600M generation, meaning driver support for older DirectX 9/10/11 applications is likely more mature. However, the P580’s superior compute performance and modern API support make it the better choice for anyone running current software, especially Vulkan titles. The data suggests that the P580 is the more versatile and future-proof part, despite being integrated, while the GTX 675M holds a niche for users who prioritize dedicated memory and pixel throughput over raw compute.