Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Comparison

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 and NVIDIA Quadro P2000 occupy very different corners of the GPU landscape. The Iris Pro is an integrated solution embedded in a Skylake processor, designed for lightweight mobile systems where power draw is critical. The Quadro P2000 is a discrete workstation card built on the Pascal architecture, aimed at professional applications that need sustained compute throughput. Benchmark data from the database shows a decisive performance gap, but the selection between these two depends entirely on the workload and platform constraints.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 wins in the specific scenario where a discrete GPU is not an option. As an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 15 W TDP, it fits into ultra-portable laptops and compact systems where adding a separate card is physically or thermally impossible. Its performance is modest, but it provides a functional graphics solution without consuming additional power or requiring a dedicated slot. The database shows its average benchmark score sits at 7170, placing it in the 39th percentile of all GPUs. This means it outperforms a small portion of the GPU field, making it suitable for basic display output, light productivity, and older or less demanding games.

The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 wins in every measurable performance category where the two are compared directly. Its average benchmark score is 6049, which is lower than the Iris Pro's average due to the inclusion of Passmark tests that heavily weight 2D and legacy DirectX workloads. However, in the modern compute and graphics tests recorded in the database, the Quadro P2000 is dramatically ahead. Its percentile ranking is 35th, but this understates its capability in professional applications, as the benchmark suite includes tests where the integrated GPU simply cannot compete. The Quadro P2000 is the clear choice for tasks like 3D modeling, CAD, video editing, and GPU-accelerated compute, provided the system can accommodate a single-slot card with a 75 W power draw.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 uses the Skylake GT4e chip, based on the Generation 9.0 architecture, manufactured on Intel's 14 nm+ process at Intel's own foundry. It integrates 576 shading units, 72 texture mapping units, and only 9 ROPs. The low ROP count severely limits its pixel fill rate, which is recorded at 9.000 GPixel/s. Its texture rate is 72.00 GTexel/s, and it delivers 1,152.0 GFLOPS of FP32 compute. For half-precision work, it reaches 2.304 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, which is a common approach for integrated graphics. Memory is entirely system-shared, with both size and type dependent on the host system's RAM, and bandwidth is marked as system dependent. It connects via a Ring Bus interface, and its display outputs are motherboard dependent, meaning the available ports vary by laptop or board design.

The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 uses the GP106 chip, based on the Pascal architecture, manufactured on TSMC's 16 nm process. The die is 200 mm² and contains 4,400 million transistors, giving a density of 22.0M per mm². It packs 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. This configuration yields a pixel rate of 59.20 GPixel/s, more than six times that of the Intel part, and a texture rate of 94.72 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 3.031 TFLOPS, roughly 2.6 times the Intel part's output. FP16 is much weaker at 47.36 GFLOPS with a 1:64 ratio, indicating that the Quadro P2000 is optimized for single-precision workloads, not half-precision compute. Memory is dedicated 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 160-bit bus, providing 140.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The card connects via PCIe 3.0 x16 and outputs to four DisplayPort 1.4a connectors. It is a single-slot card measuring 196 mm in length and 111 mm in height, with no power connectors required beyond the slot, and a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct head-to-head comparisons between these GPUs, and the results are lopsided. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 scores 9082, while the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 20125. This gives the Quadro P2000 a 54.9% advantage, meaning it delivers more than double the compute performance in this OpenCL workload. The delta is recorded as -54.9% from the perspective of the Intel part, indicating it trails by that margin. This test is particularly relevant for professional applications that leverage OpenCL for general-purpose GPU compute, such as rendering, simulation, and image processing.

In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the gap widens further. The Intel part scores 5258, while the Quadro P2000 scores 23566. The delta is -77.7%, meaning the Quadro P2000 is roughly 4.5 times faster in Vulkan graphics and compute tasks. This is a massive difference, reflecting the Pascal architecture's superior geometry processing, higher memory bandwidth, and dedicated VRAM. The integrated Intel part, with its shared memory and limited ROPs, is bottlenecked in modern API workloads that demand high fill rates and fast memory access. The data shows the Quadro P2000 wins both recorded head-to-head tests, giving it a 2-0 record in direct comparisons, while the Intel part has zero wins.

The Verdict

The choice between these two GPUs is not about performance parity; it is about platform suitability. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 is for users who have no choice but to rely on integrated graphics. Its 15 W TDP and Ring Bus interface make it a natural fit for thin-and-light laptops, where power efficiency is paramount and the motherboard determines display connectivity. The data shows it performs around the level of an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 or GTX 560 SE in average benchmark scores, with deltas of 0.2% and 0% respectively, meaning it trades blows with those older discrete cards in the aggregate. It is also within 0.5% of an AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile and 0.7% of a GTX 750, making it a competent integrated solution for basic tasks.

The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 is for professionals who need reliable, sustained performance in a workstation environment. Its 75 W TDP, single-slot design, and four DisplayPort outputs make it an easy addition to a desktop system. The benchmark data shows it is vastly superior in both OpenCL and Vulkan workloads, with leads of 54.9% and 77.7% respectively. It also has 5 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory, which is essential for large datasets and textures that would otherwise overflow system RAM. The nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 and RTX A400, both within 0.5% of its average score, and the AMD Radeon 760M at 0.5% behind, showing it is a mid-range performer among modern GPUs. For anyone building a workstation or upgrading a desktop, the Quadro P2000 is the obvious choice.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 is significantly faster, scoring 20125 versus the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580's 9082, a lead of 54.9%.

Q: How does the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 compare in Vulkan performance?

A: It trails heavily, scoring 5258 in Geekbench Vulkan compared to the Quadro P2000's 23566, a deficit of 77.7%.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The Intel Iris Pro uses system-shared memory with bandwidth dependent on the host system, while the Quadro P2000 has 5 GB of dedicated GDDR5 on a 160-bit bus with 140.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Can the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 be used in a desktop with a discrete GPU slot?

A: It is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface, meaning it is integrated into the processor and does not occupy a slot; its display outputs are motherboard dependent.

Q: What is the TDP of each GPU?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 has a TDP of 15 W, while the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 has a TDP of 75 W and requires no additional power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 has 1,024 shading units, compared to 576 on the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 | NVIDIA Quadro P2000 |

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

| Architecture | Generation 9.0 | Pascal |

| Process Node | 14 nm+ | 16 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not specified | 4,400 million |

| Die Size | Not specified | 200 mm² |

| Base Clock | 350 MHz | 1076 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1000 MHz | 1480 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 5 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 160 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 140.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 576 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 72 | 64 |

| ROPs | 9 | 40 |

| Pixel Rate | 9.000 GPixel/s | 59.20 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 72.00 GTexel/s | 94.72 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1,152.0 GFLOPS | 3.031 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 2.304 TFLOPS (2:1) | 47.36 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | 15 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | Not specified | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Motherboard Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions (Length x Height) | Not specified | 196 mm x 111 mm |

| Release Date | 2015-08-31 | 2017-02-05 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |