Over 0–100 km/h, M5 F90 wins (3,44 s vs 4,69 s).
Performance comparison
Simulated drag race 0 → 1,000 m in real time. Synchronised speed counters and stopwatch. Physics calibration on 7 manufacturer measurements.
Simulation
Calibration
Physics model calibrated on manufacturer splits. The limited top speed is not the real aerodynamic top speed of the vehicles.
| M5 F90 | iX xDrive50 I20 | |
|---|---|---|
| 0–100 km/h | 3,44 s−1,25 s | 4,69 s |
| 400 m standing start | 11,16 s−1,77 s | 12,93 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 20,22 s−3,70 s | 23,92 s |
| Top speed (electronically limited) | 250 km/h+50 km/h | 200 km/h |
| Power-to-weight ratio | 3,11 kg/hpbetter ratio | 4,94 kg/hp |
Standing-start drag race, calibrated on manufacturer splits. The gap shows at each stage.
Simulated performance at each stage. Winner in green.
| Palier | M5 F90 | iX xDrive50 I20 |
|---|---|---|
| 0–30 km/h | 1,01 s | 1,29 s |
| 0–50 km/h | 1,68 s | 2,15 s |
| 0–80 km/h | 2,64 s | 3,50 s |
| 0–100 km/h | 3,44 s | 4,69 s |
| 0–120 km/h | 4,34 s | 6,18 s |
| 0–160 km/h | 6,74 s | 10,39 s |
| 0–200 km/h | 10,14 s | 16,61 s |
| 400 m standing start | 11,16 s | 12,93 s |
| 1,000 m standing start | 20,22 s | 23,92 s |
| Top speed limited | 250 km/h | 200 km/h |
Manufacturer technical specifications. The power-to-weight ratio is the key physical factor in a drag race.
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 600 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 750 Nm | |
| Weight | 1 865 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | 8-speed M Steptronic transmission with Drivelogic, transmission oil cooling |
| Characteristic | Value | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 523 hp | Pending |
| Torque | 765 Nm | |
| Weight | 2 585 kg | manufacturer kerb weight |
| Drivetrain | Integrale (AWD) | |
| Gearbox | Single-speed fixed gear |
Off the line, the Bmw M5 hits 100 km/h in 3.44 s versus 4.69 s for the iX xDrive50. Despite lacking instant torque, 600 hp of power compensates. At this point, the Bmw M5 leads by 1.25 s and sits roughly 11 m ahead.
At 200 metres, the Bmw M5 is doing 168 km/h against 144 km/h for the iX xDrive50. The gap is 1.10 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.
At 400 metres standing start, the Bmw M5 crosses the line in 11.16 s versus 12.93 s. The 1.77 s gap represents roughly 85 m of track - a gap visible to the naked eye.
Past 400 metres, the Bmw M5 continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 235 km/h versus 200 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the Bmw M5 finishes in 20.22 s versus 23.92 s, with a 3.70 s lead.
Both rivals are electronically governed, but not at the same level: the Bmw M5 is capped at 250 (i.e. 155 mph - industry threshold) km/h, the iX xDrive50 at 200 km/h. This isn’t a physical engine limit - it’s a manufacturer choice, usually for tyre safety or homologation reasons. Neither car reaches its true aerodynamic top speed.
Instant electric torque gives an advantage off the line. The higher top speed of the combustion engine gives an advantage over longer distances. The distance at which one catches the other depends on the top speed differential.
In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 7.07 seconds. The 1.25 s difference in 0 to 100 km/h is mostly felt in motorway merging and overtaking.
Swap one of the two models to explore an equivalent duel in the same segment.
Over 0–100 km/h, M5 F90 wins (3,44 s vs 4,69 s).
M5 F90 goes from 0 to 100 km/h in 3,44 seconds (calibrated simulation).
M5 F90: 600 hp, ratio 3,11 kg/hp. iX xDrive50 I20: 523 hp, ratio 4,94 kg/hp.
M5 F90: 250 km/h. iX xDrive50 I20: 200 km/h.