GRID M10 8Q vs Iris Graphics 540

When choosing between GRID M10 8Q and Iris Graphics 540, it is worth examining the specifications of the models in detail. Do they meet the recommended requirements of modern games and software? Storage capacity, form factor, TDP, available ports, warranty and manufacturer support are all important. For example, the size of a PC case can limit the maximum thickness and length of the card. Often, instead of the factory overclocked card and RGB backlight, it is better to choose a reference model with a more efficient GPU. And make sure that your current power supply unit has the correct connection pins (using adapters is not recommended). This GPUs compare tool is meant to help you to choose the best graphics card for your build. Let's find out the difference between GRID M10 8Q and Iris Graphics 540.

GRID M10 8Q

Iris Graphics 540 Check Price

Iris Graphics 540 is a Laptop Graphics Card

Note: Iris Graphics 540 is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with Iris Graphics 540 here:

Iris Graphics 540 Laptops

Main Specs

	GRID M10 8Q	Iris Graphics 540
Power consumption (TDP)	225 Watt	15 Watt
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x1
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin
Memory type	GDDR5	eDRAM
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	64 MB
Display Connectors	No outputs	No outputs
		Check Price

GRID M10 8Q has 1400% more power consumption, than Iris Graphics 540.
GRID M10 8Q is connected by PCIe 3.0 x16, and Iris Graphics 540 uses PCIe 3.0 x1 interface.
Iris Graphics 540 has 56 GB more memory, than GRID M10 8Q.
GRID M10 8Q is used in Desktops, and Iris Graphics 540 - in Laptops.
GRID M10 8Q is build with Maxwell architecture, and Iris Graphics 540 - with Gen. 9 Skylake.
Core clock speed of GRID M10 8Q is 733 MHz higher, than Iris Graphics 540.
GRID M10 8Q is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and Iris Graphics 540 - by 14 nm process technology.

Game benchmarks


high / 1080p	12−14	8−9
ultra / 1080p	8−9	5−6
QHD / 1440p	2−3	0−1
low / 720p	27−30	20−22
medium / 1080p	16−18	10−12
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 45% more, than Iris Graphics 540.
high / 1080p	21−24	14−16
ultra / 1080p	18−20	12−14
QHD / 1440p	4−5	0−1
4K / 2160p	4−5	−
low / 720p	45−50	30−35
medium / 1080p	21−24	16−18
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in Battlefield 5 is 42% more, than Iris Graphics 540.
low / 768p	45−50	45−50
high / 1080p	−	45−50
QHD / 1440p	0−1	0−1
GRID M10 8Q and Iris Graphics 540 have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone.
low / 768p	190−200	150−160
medium / 768p	160−170	130−140
ultra / 1080p	85−90	65−70
QHD / 1440p	50−55	35−40
4K / 2160p	30−33	27−30
high / 768p	120−130	95−100
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 26% more, than Iris Graphics 540.
low / 768p	55−60	55−60
ultra / 1080p	35−40	24−27
medium / 1080p	45−50	45−50
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in Cyberpunk 2077 is 9% more, than Iris Graphics 540.
low / 768p	100−110	85−90
medium / 768p	85−90	65−70
ultra / 1080p	55−60	40−45
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in Dota 2 is 27% more, than Iris Graphics 540.
high / 1080p	14−16	10−11
ultra / 1080p	14−16	9−10
4K / 2160p	5−6	4−5
low / 720p	35−40	24−27
medium / 1080p	16−18	10−12
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in Far Cry 5 is 50% more, than Iris Graphics 540.
high / 1080p	21−24	16−18
ultra / 1080p	16−18	12−14
QHD / 1440p	16−18	−
low / 720p	90−95	70−75
medium / 1080p	45−50	30−33
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in Fortnite is 33% more, than Iris Graphics 540.
high / 1080p	21−24	14−16
ultra / 1080p	18−20	12−14
QHD / 1440p	7−8	3−4
low / 720p	45−50	30−35
medium / 1080p	24−27	16−18
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in Forza Horizon 4 is 50% more, than Iris Graphics 540.
low / 768p	75−80	60−65
medium / 768p	70−75	50−55
high / 1080p	24−27	16−18
ultra / 1080p	10−12	8−9
QHD / 1440p	1−2	0−1
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in Grand Theft Auto V is 31% more, than Iris Graphics 540.
high / 1080p	8−9	6−7
ultra / 1080p	6−7	4−5
4K / 2160p	2−3	1−2
low / 720p	24−27	16−18
medium / 1080p	10−12	8−9
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in Metro Exodus is 42% more, than Iris Graphics 540.
low / 768p	100−110	95−100
high / 1080p	−	95−100
ultra / 1080p	100−110	85−90
medium / 1080p	100−110	95−100
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in Minecraft is 11% more, than Iris Graphics 540.
high / 1080p	21−24	18−20
ultra / 1080p	16−18	14−16
low / 720p	50−55	35−40
medium / 1080p	21−24	18−20
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 27% more, than Iris Graphics 540.
high / 1080p	12−14	12−14
ultra / 1080p	9−10	8−9
QHD / 1440p	0−1	0−1
low / 720p	24−27	16−18
medium / 1080p	14−16	12−14
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 25% more, than Iris Graphics 540.
low / 768p	45−50	30−35
medium / 768p	30−33	21−24
high / 1080p	16−18	10−12
ultra / 1080p	10−11	7−8
4K / 2160p	7−8	6−7
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 37% more, than Iris Graphics 540.
low / 768p	95−100	90−95
medium / 768p	55−60	50−55
ultra / 1080p	30−35	24−27
high / 768p	50−55	40−45
The average gaming FPS of GRID M10 8Q in World of Tanks is 13% more, than Iris Graphics 540.

Full Specs

	GRID M10 8Q	Iris Graphics 540
Architecture	Maxwell	Gen. 9 Skylake
Code name	GM107	Skylake GT3e
Type	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	18 May 2016	1 September 2015
Pipelines	640	48
Core clock speed	1033 MHz	300 MHz
Boost Clock	1306 MHz	1050 MHz
Transistor count	1,870 million	189 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm
Texture fill rate	52.24	50.40
Floating-point performance	1,672 gflops
Length	267 mm
Memory bus width	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	5200 MHz
Memory bandwidth	83.2 GB/s
Shared memory		+
DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.1.97
CUDA	5.0
Quick Sync		+
		Check Price

GRID M10 8Q vs Iris Graphics 540

Iris Graphics 540 is a Laptop Graphics Card

Main Specs

Game benchmarks

Full Specs

Similar compares