Quadro K4000M vs Iris Pro Graphics P580
Quadro K4000M
Popular choices:
Iris Pro Graphics P580
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 Quadro K4000M is positioned at rank 57 and the Iris Pro Graphics P580 is on rank 326, 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 Quadro K4000M
Performance Per Dollar Iris Pro Graphics P580
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 | Quadro K4000M | Iris Pro Graphics P580 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100+%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| 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 Quadro K4000M and Iris Pro Graphics P580
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.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro K4000M scores 2,061 and the Iris Pro Graphics P580 reaches 2,026 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K4000M is built on Kepler while the Iris Pro Graphics P580 uses Generation 9.0, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm+. Shader units: 960 (Quadro K4000M) vs 576 (Iris Pro Graphics P580). Raw compute: 1.154 TFLOPS (Quadro K4000M) vs 1.21 TFLOPS (Iris Pro Graphics P580).
| Feature | Quadro K4000M | Iris Pro Graphics P580 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,061+2% | 2,026 |
| Architecture | Kepler | Generation 9.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm+ |
| Shading Units | 960+67% | 576 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.154 TFLOPS | 1.21 TFLOPS+5% |
| ROPs | 32+256% | 9 |
| TMUs | 80+11% | 72 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K4000M | Iris Pro Graphics P580 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Quadro K4000M comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Iris Pro Graphics P580 has 0 MB. The Quadro K4000M offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs System.
| Feature | Quadro K4000M | Iris Pro Graphics P580 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | Shared System RAM |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | Shared |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | System |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro K4000M draws 100W versus the Iris Pro Graphics P580's 15W — a 147.8% difference. The Iris Pro Graphics P580 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K4000M) vs 1W (Iris Pro Graphics P580). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Integrated.
| Feature | Quadro K4000M | Iris Pro Graphics P580 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 15W-85% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 1W-100% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Integrated |
| Perf/Watt | 20.6 | 135.1+556% |
Value Analysis
The Iris Pro Graphics P580 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2012).
| Feature | Quadro K4000M | Iris Pro Graphics P580 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $150 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $60 |
| Codename | GK104 | Skylake GT4e |
| Release | June 1 2012 | September 1 2015 |
| Ranking | #676 | #678 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro K4000M and Iris Pro Graphics P580
