Quadro P600 vs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
Quadro P600
Popular choices:
Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 uses modern memory architecture. The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro P600 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro P600.
| Insight | Quadro P600 | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) (10nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $50 versus $60 for the Quadro P600, it costs 17% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 22.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro P600 | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+22.6%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($60) | ✅More affordable ($50) |
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 P600 and Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
Quadro P600
The Quadro P600 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 7 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1430 MHz to 1620 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 40W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,318 points. Launch price was $178.
Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is manufactured by an unknown manufacturer. It was released in August 15 2020. It features the Gen. 11 Ice Lake architecture. It has 96 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 10 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,390 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro P600 scores 3,318 and the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 reaches 3,390 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro P600 is built on Pascal while the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 uses Gen. 11 Ice Lake, both on 14 nm vs 10 nm. Shader units: 384 (Quadro P600) vs 96 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7).
| Feature | Quadro P600 | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,318 | 3,390+2% |
| Architecture | Pascal | Gen. 11 Ice Lake |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Shading Units | 384+300% | 96 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro P600 | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Quadro P600 | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12_1 (Quadro P600) vs 12.1 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro P600 | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12.1 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6th Gen (Quadro P600) vs QuickSync (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7). Decoder: NVDEC 4th Gen vs QuickSync.
| Feature | Quadro P600 | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6th Gen | QuickSync |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th Gen | QuickSync |
| Codecs | — | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro P600 draws 40W versus the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7's 30W — a 28.6% difference. The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro P600) vs 350W (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 145mm vs 0mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Quadro P600 | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 40W | 30W-25% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 145mm | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | — | 85 |
| Perf/Watt | 83.0 | 113.0+36% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro P600 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $60, while the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 launched at $100 and now averages $50. The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 costs 16.7% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 55.3 (Quadro P600) vs 67.8 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7) — the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 offers 22.6% better value. The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2017).
| Feature | Quadro P600 | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $0-100% | $100 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $60 | $50-17% |
| Performance per Dollar | 55.3 | 67.8+23% |
| Codename | GP107 | Tiger Lake Xe |
| Release | February 7 2017 | August 15 2020 |
| Ranking | #558 | #508 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro P600 and Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
