GeForce GTX 280M vs Iris Xe Graphics G7
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Iris Xe Graphics G7 and GeForce GTX 280M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Graphics G7 outperforms 280M by a whopping 578% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 504 | 1049 |
| Place by popularity | 17 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 1.47 |
| Architecture | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | Tiger Lake Xe | G92B |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 August 2020 (5 years ago) | 3 March 2009 (17 years ago) |
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 cores | 96 | 128 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 585 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 754 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 10 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 37.44 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.3745 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | no data | 562 |
| ROPs | no data | 16 |
| TMUs | no data | 64 |
| L2 Cache | no data | 64 KB |
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).
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 |
| Interface | no data | MXM-HE |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
| SLI options | - | + |
| MXM Type | no data | MXM 3.0 Type-B |
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 type | DDR4 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | Up to 950 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 61 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
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 Connectors | no data | HDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIDisplayPortLVDSVGA |
| HDMI | - | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | S/PDIF |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | no data | 8.0 |
| Quick Sync | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX 12_1 | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | no data | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
| CUDA | - | + |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+2050%
|
2−3
−2050%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+967%
|
3−4
−967%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1080%
|
5−6
−1080%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+438%
|
8−9
−438%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+250%
|
10−11
−250%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+174%
|
30−35
−174%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+2050%
|
2−3
−2050%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 140−150
+359%
|
30−35
−359%
|
| Dota 2 | 70−75
+289%
|
18−20
−289%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+967%
|
3−4
−967%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1080%
|
5−6
−1080%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+438%
|
8−9
−438%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35−40
+3500%
|
1−2
−3500%
|
| Metro Exodus | 20−22
+900%
|
2−3
−900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+250%
|
10−11
−250%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+257%
|
7−8
−257%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+174%
|
30−35
−174%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+2050%
|
2−3
−2050%
|
| Dota 2 | 70−75
+289%
|
18−20
−289%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+967%
|
3−4
−967%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+438%
|
8−9
−438%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+250%
|
10−11
−250%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+257%
|
7−8
−257%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1080%
|
5−6
−1080%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 70−75
+640%
|
10−11
−640%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+1200%
|
1−2
−1200%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−12
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
+1314%
|
7−8
−1314%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+700%
|
3−4
−700%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+667%
|
3−4
−667%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 21−24
+950%
|
2−3
−950%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+33.3%
|
14−16
−33.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
+450%
|
8−9
−450%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+1100%
|
1−2
−1100%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+1700%
|
2−3
−1700%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+700%
|
2−3
−700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Palworld | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Palworld | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Palworld | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Palworld | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Palworld | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 is 3500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Iris Xe Graphics G7 performs better in 34 tests (72%)
- there's a draw in 13 tests (28%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.69 | 1.43 |
| Recency | 15 August 2020 | 3 March 2009 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 55 nm |
Iris Xe Graphics G7 has a 578% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 450% more advanced lithography process.
The Iris Xe Graphics G7 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 280M 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.
