Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB vs Iris Plus Graphics

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Plus Graphics and Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Iris Plus Graphics
15 Watt
4.24
RX 9060 XT 16 GB
2025, $349
16 GB GDDR6, 160 Watt
48.13
+1035%

9060 XT 16 GB outperforms Plus Graphics by a whopping 1035% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking73477
Place by popularitynot in top-10032
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data83.35
Power efficiency22.0123.43
ArchitectureGeneration 11.0 (2019−2021)RDNA 4.0 (2025−2026)
GPU code nameIce Lake GT2Navi 44
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release dateno data4 June 2025 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$349

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores5122048
Core clock speedno data1700 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz3130 MHz
Number of transistorsno data29,700 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rate32.00400.6
Floating-point processing power1.024 TFLOPS25.64 TFLOPS
ROPs864
TMUs32128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32
L0 Cacheno data512 KB
L2 Cacheno data4 MB
L3 Cacheno data32 MB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x1PCIe 5.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared16 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2518 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data322.3 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCLno data2.2
Vulkan-1.3

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

Iris Plus Graphics 4.24
RX 9060 XT 16 GB 48.13
+1035%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Iris Plus Graphics 1773
Samples: 4936
RX 9060 XT 16 GB 20135
+1036%
Samples: 9226

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD12−14157
+1208%
1440p6−770
+1067%
4K3−443
+1333%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.22
1440pno data4.99
4Kno data8.12

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 150−160 150−160
Counter-Strike 2 250−260 250−260
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120 110−120
Resident Evil 4 Remake 130−140 130−140

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 150−160 150−160
Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Counter-Strike 2 250−260 250−260
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120 110−120
Far Cry 5 270 270
Fortnite 210−220 210−220
Forza Horizon 4 180−190 180−190
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 270−280 270−280

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 150−160 150−160
Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Counter-Strike 2 250−260 250−260
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120 110−120
Far Cry 5 248 248
Fortnite 210−220 210−220
Forza Horizon 4 180−190 180−190
Grand Theft Auto V 154 154
Metro Exodus 120−130 120−130
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 273 273
Valorant 270−280 270−280

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120 110−120
Far Cry 5 233 233
Forza Horizon 4 180−190 180−190
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 146 146

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 210−220 210−220

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 130−140 130−140
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 350−400 350−400
Grand Theft Auto V 83 83
Metro Exodus 75−80 75−80
Valorant 300−350 300−350

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65 60−65
Far Cry 5 160 160
Forza Horizon 4 140−150 140−150
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 102 102

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 130−140 130−140

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 60−65 60−65
Grand Theft Auto V 91 91
Metro Exodus 45−50 45−50
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 84 84
Valorant 290−300 290−300

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 80−85 80−85
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30 27−30
Far Cry 5 80 80
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 100−110
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80 75−80

4K
Epic

Fortnite 70−75 70−75

This is how Iris Plus Graphics and RX 9060 XT 16 GB compete in popular games:

  • RX 9060 XT 16 GB is 1208% faster in 1080p
  • RX 9060 XT 16 GB is 1067% faster in 1440p
  • RX 9060 XT 16 GB is 1333% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 55 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.24 48.13
Chip lithography 10 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 160 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics has 91% lower power consumption.

RX 9060 XT 16 GB, on the other hand, has a 1035% higher aggregate performance score, and a 60% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Plus Graphics in performance tests.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.9 496 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 2065 votes

Rate Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Iris Plus Graphics or Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.