Iris Pro Graphics P580 vs Quadro K4000M
Iris Pro Graphics P580
Popular choices:
Quadro K4000M
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Iris Pro Graphics P580 is positioned at rank 326 and the Quadro K4000M is on rank 57, so the Quadro K4000M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Iris Pro Graphics P580
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K4000M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro K4000M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.7% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (4 GB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Iris Pro Graphics P580.
| Insight | Iris Pro Graphics P580 | Quadro K4000M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100+%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro K4000M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Iris Pro Graphics P580 and Quadro K4000M
Iris Pro Graphics P580
The Iris Pro Graphics P580 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in September 1 2015. It features the Generation 9.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 350 MHz to 1050 MHz. It has 576 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 14 nm+ process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,026 points.
Quadro K4000M
The Quadro K4000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 1 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 601 MHz. It has 960 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,061 points.
Graphics Performance
The Iris Pro Graphics P580 scores 2,026 and the Quadro K4000M reaches 2,061 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Iris Pro Graphics P580 is built on Generation 9.0 while the Quadro K4000M uses Kepler, both on 14 nm+ vs 28 nm. Shader units: 576 (Iris Pro Graphics P580) vs 960 (Quadro K4000M). Raw compute: 1.21 TFLOPS (Iris Pro Graphics P580) vs 1.154 TFLOPS (Quadro K4000M).
| Feature | Iris Pro Graphics P580 | Quadro K4000M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,026 | 2,061+2% |
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 14 nm+ | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 576 | 960+67% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.21 TFLOPS+5% | 1.154 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 9 | 32+256% |
| TMUs | 72 | 80+11% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Iris Pro Graphics P580 | Quadro K4000M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Iris Pro Graphics P580 comes with 0 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro K4000M has 4 GB. The Quadro K4000M offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: System vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Iris Pro Graphics P580 | Quadro K4000M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | Shared System RAM | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | Shared | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | System | 64-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The Iris Pro Graphics P580 draws 15W versus the Quadro K4000M's 100W — a 147.8% difference. The Iris Pro Graphics P580 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 1W (Iris Pro Graphics P580) vs 350W (Quadro K4000M). Power connectors: Integrated vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Iris Pro Graphics P580 | Quadro K4000M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 15W-85% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 1W-100% | 350W |
| Power Connector | Integrated | PCIe-powered |
| Perf/Watt | 135.1+556% | 20.6 |
Value Analysis
The Iris Pro Graphics P580 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2012).
| Feature | Iris Pro Graphics P580 | Quadro K4000M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $150 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $60 | — |
| Codename | Skylake GT4e | GK104 |
| Release | September 1 2015 | June 1 2012 |
| Ranking | #678 | #676 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Iris Pro Graphics P580 and Quadro K4000M
