Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU vs UHD Graphics 750

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
16EU 710 730 750 770 P750
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
B370 B390 G3 G3 Extreme Graphics 2 Xe Mobile Graphics 4 Xe Mobile Pro B370 Pro B390 Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU Graphics 4 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics 750 with Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU, including specs and performance data.

UHD Graphics 750
2021
15 Watt
4.16

Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU outperforms Graphics 750 by an impressive 51% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
UHD Graphics 750 UHD Graphics 750
Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking741635
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency21.47no data
ArchitectureGeneration 12.1 (2020−2021)no data
GPU code nameRocket Lake GT1Panther Lake
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date30 March 2021 (5 years ago)8 January 2026 (less than a year 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 cores25616
Core clock speed300 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1300 MHzno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm+++no data
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rate20.80no data
Floating-point processing power0.6656 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs16no data
L2 Cacheno data4 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).

InterfaceRing Busno data
WidthIGPno 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 typeSystem Sharedno data
Maximum RAM amountSystem Sharedno data
Memory bus widthSystem Sharedno data
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)no data
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL3.0no data
Vulkan1.2-

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 HD10−12
−60%
16
+60%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 10−11
−50%
14−16
+50%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
−72.2%
30−35
+72.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−62.5%
12−14
+62.5%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 10−11
−50%
14−16
+50%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−58.8%
27−30
+58.8%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
−72.2%
30−35
+72.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−62.5%
12−14
+62.5%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−66.7%
20−22
+66.7%
Fortnite 24−27
−58.3%
35−40
+58.3%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−45%
27−30
+45%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
−63.6%
18−20
+63.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−35.3%
21−24
+35.3%
Valorant 55−60
−25%
70−75
+25%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 10−11
−50%
14−16
+50%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−58.8%
27−30
+58.8%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
−72.2%
30−35
+72.2%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
−40.5%
100−110
+40.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−62.5%
12−14
+62.5%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−66.7%
20−22
+66.7%
Fortnite 24−27
−58.3%
35−40
+58.3%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−45%
27−30
+45%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
−63.6%
18−20
+63.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
−69.2%
21−24
+69.2%
Metro Exodus 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−35.3%
21−24
+35.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−41.7%
16−18
+41.7%
Valorant 55−60
−25%
70−75
+25%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
−58.8%
27−30
+58.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−62.5%
12−14
+62.5%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−66.7%
20−22
+66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−45%
27−30
+45%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−35.3%
21−24
+35.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−41.7%
16−18
+41.7%
Valorant 55−60
−42.9%
80−85
+42.9%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
−58.3%
35−40
+58.3%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
−53.1%
45−50
+53.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−36.4%
45−50
+36.4%
Valorant 40−45
−52.4%
60−65
+52.4%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
−1000%
10−12
+1000%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−71.4%
12−14
+71.4%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−50%
14−16
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
−62.5%
12−14
+62.5%

4K
High

Atomic Heart 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−6.3%
16−18
+6.3%
Valorant 18−20
−50%
27−30
+50%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 0−1 5−6
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%

4K
High

Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how UHD Graphics 750 and Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU compete in popular games:

  • Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU is 60% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU is 1000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU performs better in 51 tests (94%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (6%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 4.16 6.30
Recency 30 March 2021 8 January 2026

Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU has a 51% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 4 years.

The Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics 750 in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics 750 is a desktop graphics card while Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU 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.

UHD Graphics 750 UHD Graphics 750
vs
GTX 650 GeForce GTX 650
Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU
vs
Graphics 2 Xe3 Wildcat Lake iGPU Graphics 2 Xe3 Wildcat Lake iGPU
UHD Graphics 750 UHD Graphics 750
vs
UHD Graphics P750 UHD Graphics P750
RTX A4000 RTX A4000
vs
RTX A1000 Mobile 6 GB RTX A1000 Mobile 6 GB
RTX 3050 Mobile RTX 3050 Mobile
vs
RX 6650M XT RX 6650M XT
RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
vs
RX 6300M 6300M
GT 1010 GT 1010
vs
RTX 4070 Ti SUPER RTX 4070 Ti SUPER
RX 6700M RX 6700M
vs
Arc 8-Core iGPU Arc 8 Core iGPU
CMP 50HX CMP 50HX
vs
RTX A2000 12 GB RTX A2000 12 GB
CMP 50HX CMP 50HX
vs
RTX 3050 Mobile Refresh 4 GB RTX 3050 Mobile Refresh 4 GB
CMP 90HX CMP 90HX
vs
Arc B370 Arc B370
RX 6800M RX 6800M
vs
RX 6650 XT 6650 XT
Tesla PG500-216 Tesla PG500-216
vs
CMP 100HX-210 CMP 100HX-210

Community ratings

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

3.6 444 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about UHD Graphics 750 or Graphics 2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.