Iris Xe MAX Graphics vs GRID K260Q

Place in performance ranking	496	387
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Gen. 12 Xe (2020)
GPU code name	GK104	iDG1LPDEV
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	28 June 2013 (11 years ago)	31 October 2020 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$937	no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1536	96
Core clock speed	745 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	no data	1650 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	225 Watt	25 Watt
Texture fill rate	95.36	79.20
Floating-point performance	2,289 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GRID K260Q and Iris Xe MAX Graphics compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
Width	IGP	no 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 type	GDDR5	LPDDR4x
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	5000 MHz	4266 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160.0 GB/s	68.26 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.2
CUDA	3.0	no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GRID K260Q 7.64

Iris Xe MAX Graphics 11.43
+49.6%

Iris Xe MAX Graphics outperforms GRID K260Q by 50% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GRID K260Q 2949
+49.6%

Iris Xe MAX Graphics 1971

GRID K260Q outperforms Iris Xe MAX Graphics by 50% in Passmark.

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 HD	16−18 −62.5%	26 +62.5%
1440p	12−14 −66.7%	20 +66.7%
4K	10−12 −70%	17 +70%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

12−14

−50%

18−20
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 −64.3%	21−24 +64.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −58.3%	19 +58.3%
Battlefield 5	24−27 −50%	35−40 +50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 −64.3%	21−24 +64.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −50%	18−20 +50%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −50%	27−30 +50%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 −52.4%	30−35 +52.4%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −57.1%	55−60 +57.1%
Hitman 3	16−18 −50%	24 +50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−33 −60%	48 +60%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −62.9%	57 +62.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −57.1%	33 +57.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 −62.5%	39 +62.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 −66.7%	40−45 +66.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 −64.3%	21−24 +64.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −50%	6 +50%
Battlefield 5	24−27 −50%	35−40 +50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 −64.3%	21−24 +64.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −50%	18−20 +50%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −50%	27−30 +50%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 −52.4%	30−35 +52.4%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −57.1%	55−60 +57.1%
Hitman 3	8−9 −50%	12 +50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−33 −56.7%	45−50 +56.7%
Metro Exodus	21−24 −57.1%	33 +57.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −66.7%	30 +66.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 −57.1%	33 +57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −61.9%	34 +61.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 −66.7%	40−45 +66.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 −64.3%	21−24 +64.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −50%	18−20 +50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 −64.3%	21−24 +64.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −50%	18−20 +50%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −50%	27−30 +50%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −57.1%	55−60 +57.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 −62.5%	26 +62.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18−20 −61.1%	29 +61.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −50%	18 +50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 −66.7%	40−45 +66.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18

−56.3%

25
+56.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 −57.1%	21−24 +57.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −66.7%	20−22 +66.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −57.1%	10−12 +57.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 −60%	8−9 +60%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −55.6%	14−16 +55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Far Cry 5	12−14 −50%	18−20 +50%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −50%	21−24 +50%
Hitman 3	9−10 −55.6%	14−16 +55.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −64.3%	21−24 +64.3%
Metro Exodus	12−14 −50%	18−20 +50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −66.7%	20 +66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −57.1%	10−12 +57.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14

−58.3%

18−20
+58.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 −57.1%	10−12 +57.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −60%	8−9 +60%
Hitman 3	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −50%	12−14 +50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −57.1%	11 +57.1%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	1−2
Far Cry 5	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 −50%	14−16 +50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −50%	12−14 +50%
Metro Exodus	7−8 −57.1%	10−12 +57.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
−57.1%

10−12

+57.1%

This is how GRID K260Q and Iris Xe MAX Graphics compete in popular games:

Iris Xe MAX Graphics is 63% faster in 1080p
Iris Xe MAX Graphics is 67% faster in 1440p
Iris Xe MAX Graphics is 70% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.64	11.43
Recency	28 June 2013	31 October 2020
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	225 Watt	25 Watt