Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX330 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data splits this comparison cleanly across two very different workloads. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 posts a score of 9082, which puts it 13.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce MX330's 7896. That is a decisive margin in compute-oriented OpenCL tasks. However, the tables turn completely in Geekbench Vulkan, where the MX330 scores 9019 against the P580's 5258, a 71.5% advantage for NVIDIA. The delta here is enormous, and it shows that the MX330 has a clear edge in modern graphics API workloads.

Looking at the average benchmark score, the MX330 lands at 8458, while the P580 sits at 7170. The MX330's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 8870M at 8462 (a 0% delta), the AMD Radeon 880M at 8436 (0.3% faster than the MX330), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX at 8427 (0.4% behind). The Intel Arc A380 is 1.2% ahead with 8558. For the P580, its closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE at 7171 (0% delta), with the GeForce GTX 970 at 7157 (0.2% behind), the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile at 7203 (0.5% ahead), and the GeForce GTX 750 at 7222 (0.7% ahead). These figures place the MX330 in a stronger overall position, roughly 18% higher average score than the P580.

In Vulkan, the MX330's 9019 score is not just a win over the P580; it is also above the P580's OpenCL result. That means the NVIDIA part is consistently strong across its two recorded benchmarks, whereas the Intel part shows a massive drop when moving from OpenCL to Vulkan. The 71.5% delta in Vulkan is the single largest gap in this comparison, and it defines the overall narrative.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 wins in OpenCL compute. Its 9082 score is 13.1% higher than the MX330's 7896. This advantage likely stems from its 576 shading units and 72 texture mapping units, which provide substantial parallel compute throughput. For users running OpenCL-accelerated applications, the P580 is the stronger choice in this matchup.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 wins decisively in Vulkan. Its 9019 score crushes the P580's 5258 by 71.5%. This is a generation-defining difference in graphics API performance. The MX330 also holds the higher average benchmark score overall, 8458 versus 7170, which places it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs compared to the P580's 39th. The MX330's pixel rate of 25.50 GPixel/s is also far ahead of the P580's 9.000 GPixel/s, suggesting better fill-rate-bound performance in rasterization-heavy scenes.

For gaming and modern graphics workloads, the MX330 is clearly superior based on the Vulkan results. For compute-heavy, OpenCL-specific tasks, the P580 retains a modest edge. The P580 also has a higher texture rate at 72.00 GTexel/s versus 38.26 GTexel/s on the MX330, which could benefit certain texture-heavy workloads despite the lower pixel rate.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from completely different design philosophies. The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 is built on the GP108B chip using the Pascal architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at Samsung. It contains 1,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 24.3M per mm². The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 uses the Skylake GT4e chip with Intel's Generation 9.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm+ process at Intel. Its transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

The MX330 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The P580 has 576 shading units, 72 TMUs, and only 9 ROPs. This means the Intel part has 50% more shading units and 3 times the texture units, but the NVIDIA part has nearly double the ROP count. The clock speeds differ sharply: the MX330 runs at a 1531 MHz base and 1594 MHz boost, while the P580 runs at 350 MHz base and 1000 MHz boost. The MX330's much higher clocks explain its pixel rate advantage despite fewer ROPs.

Memory configurations are entirely different. The MX330 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 56.06 GB/s and memory clocked at 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The P580 uses system-shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, and its bandwidth is listed as system dependent. This gives the MX330 a dedicated, fast memory pool, which is critical for gaming performance.

The FP32 compute figures are close: the MX330 delivers 1,224.2 GFLOPS, while the P580 delivers 1,152.0 GFLOPS. However, the FP16 numbers diverge drastically. The P580 outputs 2.304 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the MX330 produces only 19.13 GFLOPS with a 1:64 ratio. This makes the P580 far more capable for FP16 compute tasks, which is notable for certain AI and media workloads.

Power consumption also differs: the MX330 has a TDP of 10 W, while the P580 is rated at 15 W. Both are integrated or IGP-class parts, with the MX330 using PCIe 3.0 x4 and the P580 using a Ring Bus interface. The MX330 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the P580 is limited to Vulkan 1.3. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6.

The release dates are far apart: the P580 launched in 2015, while the MX330 arrived in 2020. Both are end-of-life products in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 has an average score of 8458, which is significantly higher than the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580's 7170.

Q: How much faster is the Intel part in OpenCL?

A: The P580 scores 9082 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 13.1% ahead of the MX330's 7896.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between these two GPUs?

A: The largest delta is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the MX330 scores 9019 versus the P580's 5258, a 71.5% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX and OpenGL versions?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. However, the MX330 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the P580 only supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 has 576 shading units, compared to the MX330's 384.

Q: How do their memory systems differ?

A: The MX330 uses 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory with a 64-bit bus and 56.06 GB/s bandwidth. The P580 uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two GPUs differ, based on the recorded data.

| Field | NVIDIA GeForce MX330 | Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Pascal | Generation 9.0 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 14 nm+ |

| Foundry | Samsung | Intel |

| Transistors | 1,800 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 74 mm² | Not recorded |

| Transistor Density | 24.3M / mm² | Not recorded |

| Base Clock | 1531 MHz | 350 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1594 MHz | 1000 MHz |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 56.06 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 384 | 576 |

| TMUs | 24 | 72 |

| ROPs | 16 | 9 |

| Pixel Rate | 25.50 GPixel/s | 9.000 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 38.26 GTexel/s | 72.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,224.2 GFLOPS | 1,152.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 19.13 GFLOPS (1:64) | 2.304 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 10 W | 15 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x4 | Ring Bus |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | Motherboard Dependent |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2020-02-09 | 2015-08-31 |

| Geekbench OpenCL | 7896 | 9082 |

| Geekbench Vulkan | 9019 | 5258 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 8458 | 7170 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 43 | 39 |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on use case. If the workload is Vulkan-based, such as modern gaming or graphics-intensive applications, the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 is the obvious pick. Its 71.5% Vulkan lead is overwhelming, and its higher average benchmark score of 8458 reinforces that it is the faster part overall. The MX330 also delivers more than double the pixel rate of the P580, which matters for fill-rate-bound scenarios.

If the workload is OpenCL compute, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 holds a 13.1% advantage. Its 576 shading units and 72 TMUs give it a structural edge in parallel compute tasks, and its FP16 throughput of 2.304 TFLOPS dwarfs the MX330's 19.13 GFLOPS. For users running OpenCL-specific applications or FP16-heavy workloads, the P580 is the better choice.

The MX330 is also more power-efficient, with a 10 W TDP versus 15 W for the P580, and it has dedicated GDDR5 memory, which is generally preferable for gaming. The P580's system-shared memory is a limitation that the benchmark data reflects in the Vulkan test.

In practical terms, the MX330 is the GPU for gamers and general graphics use, while the P580 is a compute-oriented part with a niche advantage in OpenCL. The MX330's newer release date and higher percentile ranking (43 versus 39) further support it as the stronger all-round product. The verdict is straightforward: for most users, the MX330 is the superior choice; for OpenCL compute specialists, the P580's numbers make it worth considering.