Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 vs NVIDIA Quadro M5000M Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M compare to the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 in raw compute performance?

A: The database shows a single head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, where the Quadro M5000M scores 22920 against 5712 for the Iris Pro P6300. That is a 301.3% advantage for the NVIDIA part, roughly four times the OpenCL score.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU, and where do they rank relative to all GPUs?

A: The Quadro M5000M has an average benchmark score of 6481, placing it in the 37th percentile of all GPUs. The Intel Iris Pro P6300 has an average score of 5712, placing it in the 33rd percentile. The NVIDIA part sits slightly higher in the overall distribution.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate and texture rate?

A: The Quadro M5000M delivers 67.26 GPixel/s and 100.9 GTexel/s. The Iris Pro P6300 delivers 4.800 GPixel/s and 38.40 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA part is far ahead in pixel throughput and more than 2.5 times ahead in texture rate.

Q: How do the two GPUs differ in memory configuration?

A: The Quadro M5000M uses 8 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 160.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Iris Pro P6300 uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth, so its memory performance is not directly comparable.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each GPU?

A: The Quadro M5000M is rated at 100 W and comes as an MXM module. The Intel Iris Pro P6300 is rated at 15 W and is an integrated GPU (IGP) on a ring bus. The Intel part consumes far less power.

Q: Which GPU supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The Quadro M5000M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Iris Pro P6300 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0. The NVIDIA part has the higher specification across all three APIs.

The Verdict

The data makes a clear separation: the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M is the dominant performer in every recorded metric. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 22920 is 301.3% higher than the Intel Iris Pro P6300's 5712. The Quadro also has a higher average benchmark score (6481 versus 5712) and a higher percentile ranking (37th versus 33rd). For any workload that relies on compute throughput, pixel fill, or texture processing, the Quadro M5000M is the definitive choice.

The Intel Iris Pro P6300, however, is not without its place. Its 15 W TDP makes it suitable for power-constrained systems, and as an integrated part it requires no separate power connectors and uses system-shared memory. The Quadro M5000M, by contrast, is a 100 W MXM module with 8 GB of dedicated GDDR5. For a mobile workstation with a discrete graphics slot and adequate cooling, the Quadro M5000M wins outright. For a compact, low-power platform where integrated graphics are the only option, the Iris Pro P6300 is the only one of the two that fits.

The verdict is straightforward: buy the Quadro M5000M for performance, and accept the Iris Pro P6300 only when the platform demands integrated graphics.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database lists exactly one head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The Quadro M5000M scores 22920, while the Iris Pro P6300 scores 5712. The delta is 301.3% in favor of the NVIDIA part. This is a decisive margin, not a marginal edge. The Quadro M5000M's OpenCL result is roughly four times the Intel part's result, indicating a much larger compute pipeline and memory subsystem.

Looking at the surrounding benchmark data reinforces this gap. The Quadro M5000M records a Passmark G3D score of 7062 and a Passmark GPU Compute score of 2756. The Iris Pro P6300 has no recorded Passmark results in the database, so its peak measured performance is limited to that single OpenCL score. The Quadro also posts Geekbench Vulkan at 24875, while no Vulkan score is recorded for the Intel part.

The nearest rival data for each GPU puts their performance in context. The Quadro M5000M's average score of 6481 sits within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile (6476) and 0.2% below the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M (6493). The Iris Pro P6300's average score of 5712 is within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX (5721) and 0.4% above the AMD Radeon HD 8790M (5691). So while the Quadro M5000M competes with mid-range discrete mobile GPUs, the Iris Pro P6300 competes with older or lower-tier discrete parts. The performance hierarchy is clear.

In terms of fill rates, the Quadro M5000M achieves 67.26 GPixel/s and 100.9 GTexel/s, versus 4.800 GPixel/s and 38.40 GTexel/s for the Iris Pro P6300. The pixel rate gap is especially large, reflecting the Quadro's 64 ROPs against the Intel part's 6 ROPs. Texture rate is also strongly in the NVIDIA part's favor, with 96 TMUs versus 48 TMUs and a higher clock.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field.

The Quadro M5000M is built by NVIDIA on TSMC's 28 nm process, with 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die. Its transistor density is 13.1M per mm². The Iris Pro P6300 is built by Intel on a 14 nm process, with no transistor count, die size, or density recorded in the database.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The Quadro M5000M has a base clock of 962 MHz and a boost clock of 1051 MHz, with memory clocked at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The Iris Pro P6300 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 800 MHz, with system-shared memory.

Memory configuration is another major difference. The Quadro M5000M has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Iris Pro P6300 uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth, so no dedicated memory bandwidth figure exists.

The compute units differ as well. The Quadro M5000M has 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The Iris Pro P6300 has 384 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 6 ROPs.

Power and form factor: the Quadro M5000M is a 100 W MXM module with no power connectors, while the Iris Pro P6300 is a 15 W IGP on a ring bus. The Quadro uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface; the Intel part uses a ring bus.

Display outputs: the Quadro M5000M is listed as portable-device dependent, while the Iris Pro P6300 is motherboard dependent.

Release timing differs: the Quadro M5000M was released on 2015-08-17, while the Iris Pro P6300 was released on 2014-09-04. Both are marked end-of-life in the database.

API support differs in favor of NVIDIA: DirectX 12 (12_1) versus DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6 versus 4.4, and Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.0.

Architecture Differences

The architecture gap between these two GPUs is fundamental. The NVIDIA Quadro M5000M uses the GM204 chip based on Maxwell 2.0, belonging to the Quadro Maxwell-M (Mx000M) generation. The Intel Iris Pro P6300 uses the Broadwell GT3e chip based on Generation 8.0, belonging to the HD Graphics-W (Broadwell) generation.

The process node difference is significant: 28 nm for the NVIDIA part versus 14 nm for the Intel part. Intel's process is smaller, but the Quadro packs far more silicon: 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die. The Iris Pro P6300 has no recorded transistor count or die size, but its shading unit count of 384 versus 1536 indicates a much smaller compute core.

The memory architecture is also fundamentally different. The Quadro M5000M uses dedicated GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus and 160.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Iris Pro P6300 relies on system-shared memory, with bandwidth dependent on the host system. This affects not only raw bandwidth but also latency and memory contention in real workloads.

The compute throughput figures reflect the architectural divide. The Quadro M5000M delivers 3.229 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Iris Pro P6300 delivers 614.4 GFLOPS. That is roughly a 5.3 times gap in raw floating-point throughput, consistent with the 301.3% OpenCL delta observed in the head-to-head benchmark.

The ROP count is a major architectural differentiator. The Quadro M5000M has 64 ROPs versus 6 ROPs on the Iris Pro P6300, explaining the massive pixel rate gap (67.26 GPixel/s versus 4.800 GPixel/s). The TMU count also favors NVIDIA: 96 versus 48, contributing to the texture rate gap (100.9 GTexel/s versus 38.40 GTexel/s).

Feature sets differ by generation. The Quadro M5000M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Iris Pro P6300 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0. The Maxwell 2.0 architecture in the Quadro includes feature levels that the older Broadwell graphics core does not expose.

The Quadro M5000M's predecessor is the Quadro Kepler-M and its successor is the Quadro Pascal-M. The Iris Pro P6300 has no recorded predecessor or successor in the database, reflecting its more isolated position in Intel's product stack.

In summary, the Quadro M5000M is a large discrete GPU built for mobile workstations, with a wide memory bus, high ROP count, and much higher compute throughput. The Iris Pro P6300 is a power-efficient integrated GPU that trades performance for a 15 W TDP and system-shared memory. The architecture differences explain the benchmark results completely.