Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 vs Quadro M2000M

CPU

GPU

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7

2020

Quadro M2000M

2015Core: 1029 MHzBoost: 1098 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7

3,390

0.0%

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU

Radeon RX 6600 XT

GeForce RTX 5060

Quadro M2000M

3,410

+0.6%

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU

GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER

GeForce RTX 5060

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 Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is positioned at rank 150 and the Quadro M2000M is on rank 177, so the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7

#42

Radeon RX 6600S

MSRP: $400|Avg: $400

96%

#140

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

320%

#142

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

290%

#143

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

290%

#147

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

263%

#148

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

262%

#150

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7

MSRP: $100|Avg: $50

100%

#157

GeForce 830M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30

99%

#158

GeForce GT 750M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

98%

#159

GeForce GT 425M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $25

98%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro M2000M

#78

Quadro RTX 5000

MSRP: $2299|Avg: $692

99%

#79

Quadro RTX 5000 (móvel)

MSRP: $2299|Avg: $692

98%

#80

Radeon Pro W6800X

MSRP: $2799|Avg: $2799

94%

#81

Tesla T10

MSRP: $2000|Avg: $975

92%

#82

RTX A5000

MSRP: $3721|Avg: $1800

90%

#83

Radeon Pro Vega 64X

MSRP: $2200|Avg: $2200

89%

#162

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

2166%

#177

Quadro M2000M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#180

Radeon R7 PRO A10-9700E

MSRP: $139|Avg: $85

97%

#181

FirePro M5950

MSRP: $200|Avg: $200

96%

#183

Radeon Pro WX 7130

MSRP: $1000|Avg: $200

94%

#184

FirePro W7100

MSRP: $799|Avg: $114

93%

#185

P106-090

MSRP: $389|Avg: $30

93%

#186

Radeon Pro WX 4130

MSRP: $300|Avg: $100

92%

#188

Tesla M6

MSRP: $1000|Avg: $84

91%

#190

CMP 30HX

MSRP: $799|Avg: $60

90%

#191

FirePro W2100

MSRP: $139|Avg: $30

90%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

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 M2000M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro M2000M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.6% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7.

Insight	Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7	Quadro M2000M
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.6%)	✅Leading raw performance (+0.6%)
Longevity	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) (10nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017))
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 M2000M 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.

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 Benchmark Check

Quadro M2000M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 and Quadro M2000M

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.

Quadro M2000M

The Quadro M2000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 3 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1029 MHz to 1098 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,410 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 scores 3,390 and the Quadro M2000M reaches 3,410 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is built on Gen. 11 Ice Lake while the Quadro M2000M uses Maxwell, both on 10 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 96 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7) vs 640 (Quadro M2000M).

Feature	Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7	Quadro M2000M
G3D Mark Score	3,390	3,410
Architecture	Gen. 11 Ice Lake	Maxwell
Process Node	10 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	96	640+567%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7	Quadro M2000M
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 Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M2000M has 4 GB. The Quadro M2000M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.

Feature	Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7	Quadro M2000M
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	4 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12.1 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7) vs 12 (11_0) (Quadro M2000M). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7	Quadro M2000M
DirectX	12.1	12 (11_0)
Vulkan	1.2	1.4+17%
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: QuickSync (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7) vs 4th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M2000M). Decoder: QuickSync vs PureVideo HD VP6. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,MPEG-2 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7) vs H.264,HEVC (Quadro M2000M).

Feature	Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7	Quadro M2000M
Encoder	QuickSync	4th Gen NVENC (Maxwell)
Decoder	QuickSync	PureVideo HD VP6
Codecs	H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,MPEG-2	H.264,HEVC

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 draws 30W versus the Quadro M2000M's 55W — a 58.8% difference. The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7) vs 350W (Quadro M2000M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 85 vs 80°C.