Iris Xe Graphics G7 vs GeForce GTX 680

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 680 with Iris Xe Graphics G7, including specs and performance data.

GTX 680
2012
2048 MB GDDR5, 195 Watt
14.38
+34.3%

GTX 680 outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 by a substantial 34% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking340397
Place by popularitynot in top-10016
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.20no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGK104Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date22 March 2012 (12 years ago)15 August 2020 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 no data
Current price$156 (0.3x MSRP)no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores153696
CUDA cores1536no data
Core clock speed1006 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1058 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,540 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)195 Wattno data
Texture fill rate128.8 billion/secno data
Floating-point performance3,090.4 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 680 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 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.

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length10.0" (25.4 cm)no data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsTwo 6-pinno data
SLI options+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 typeGDDR5DDR4
Maximum RAM amount2048 MBno data
Memory bus width256-bit GDDR5no data
Memory clock speed6000 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth192.2 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPortno data
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+no data
HDCP+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)DirectX 12_1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.2no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.1.126no data
CUDA+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.

GTX 680 14.38
+34.3%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 10.71

GeForce GTX 680 outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 by 34% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 680 10217
+52.3%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 6710

GeForce GTX 680 outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 by 52% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 680 7587
+57.4%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 4820

GeForce GTX 680 outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 by 57% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 680 47130
+23.9%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 38040

GeForce GTX 680 outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 by 24% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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:

900p45
+50%
30−35
−50%
Full HD77
+40%
55−60
−40%
4K23
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Battlefield 5 45−50 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Far Cry 5 30−35 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40 no data
Forza Horizon 4 65−70 no data
Hitman 3 27−30
+55.6%
18−20
−55.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60 no data
Metro Exodus 45−50
+37.1%
35−40
−37.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+34.3%
35−40
−34.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Battlefield 5 45−50 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Far Cry 5 30−35 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40 no data
Forza Horizon 4 65−70 no data
Hitman 3 27−30
+55.6%
18−20
−55.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60 no data
Metro Exodus 45−50 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 42 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+34.3%
35−40
−34.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Far Cry 5 30−35 no data
Forza Horizon 4 65−70 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+45%
40−45
−45%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+50%
30−33
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+34.3%
35−40
−34.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+48.1%
27−30
−48.1%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+55.6%
18−20
−55.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Far Cry 5 21−24 no data
Forza Horizon 4 27−30 no data
Hitman 3 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Hitman 3 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16 no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 8−9 no data
Forza Horizon 4 18−20 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%

This is how GTX 680 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 680 is 50% faster in 900p
  • GTX 680 is 40% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 680 is 44% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.38 10.71
Recency 22 March 2012 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm

The GeForce GTX 680 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 680 is a desktop card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680
GeForce GTX 680
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7
Iris Xe Graphics G7

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.8 560 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 2190 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.