Iris Pro Graphics 580 vs Radeon PRO W7600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon PRO W7600 with Iris Pro Graphics 580, including specs and performance data.

PRO W7600
2023, $599
8 GB GDDR6, 130 Watt
39.54
+795%
Iris Pro Graphics 580
2015
64 GB DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4, 15 Watt
4.42

PRO W7600 outperforms Pro Graphics 580 by a whopping 795% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking127724
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation39.03no data
Power efficiency23.5422.81
ArchitectureRDNA 3 (2023−2025)Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)
GPU code nameNavi 33Skylake GT4e
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date3 August 2023 (3 years ago)1 September 2015 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 no data

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 cores2048576
Core clock speed1720 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speed2440 MHz950 MHz
Number of transistors13.3 billion189 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm14 nm+
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate312.368.40
Floating-point processing powerno data1.094 TFLOPS
ROPs649
TMUs12872
Ray Tracing Cores32no data
L0 Cache512 KBno data
L1 Cache512 KBno data
L2 Cache2 MBno data
L3 Cache32 MBno data

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 4.0 x8Ring Bus
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR6DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amount8 GB64 GB
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed2250 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth288.0 GB/sno data
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 Connectors4x DisplayPort 2.1Portable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.96.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.41.3

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.

PRO W7600 39.54
+795%
Iris Pro Graphics 580 4.42

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.

PRO W7600 16472
+795%
Samples: 89
Iris Pro Graphics 580 1841
Samples: 487

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 HD160−170
+789%
18
−789%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.74no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 15
+0%
15
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 14
+0%
14
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
High

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how PRO W7600 and Iris Pro Graphics 580 compete in popular games:

  • PRO W7600 is 789% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 59 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 39.54 4.42
Recency 3 August 2023 1 September 2015
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 64 GB
Chip lithography 6 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 15 Watt

PRO W7600 has a 795% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 133% more advanced lithography process.

Iris Pro Graphics 580, on the other hand, has a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 767% lower power consumption.

The Radeon PRO W7600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Pro Graphics 580 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon PRO W7600 is a workstation graphics card while Iris Pro Graphics 580 is a notebook one.

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.


4.9 8 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 18 votes

Rate Iris Pro Graphics 580 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon PRO W7600 or Iris Pro Graphics 580, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.