Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs GeForce GTX 850A

Place in the ranking	807	532
Place by popularity	not in top-100	73
Power efficiency	4.18	18.65
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code name	GM107	Tiger Lake Xe
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	17 March 2014 (10 years ago)	15 August 2020 (4 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	640	80
Core clock speed	902 MHz	400 MHz
Boost clock speed	936 MHz	1350 MHz
Number of transistors	1,870 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	28 Watt
Texture fill rate	37.44	no data
Floating-point processing power	1.198 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	no data
TMUs	40	no 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).

Interface

PCIe 3.0 x16

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	DDR3	no data
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	28.8 GB/s	no data
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

no data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12_1
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	1.1.126	-
CUDA	5.0	-

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	6−7 −217%	19 +217%
1440p	3−4 −233%	10 +233%
4K	5−6 −200%	15 +200%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	11 +0%	11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14 +0%	14 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12 +0%	12 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	12 +0%	12 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30 +0%	30 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	14 +0%	14 +0%
Metro Exodus	27 +0%	27 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Valorant	18 +0%	18 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10 +0%	10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5 +0%	5 +0%
Dota 2	22 +0%	22 +0%
Far Cry 5	26 +0%	26 +0%
Fortnite	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	24 +0%	24 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	13 +0%	13 +0%
Metro Exodus	17 +0%	17 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6 +0%	6 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Valorant	14 +0%	14 +0%
World of Tanks	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	9 +0%	9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4 +0%	4 +0%
Dota 2	36 +0%	36 +0%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	20 +0%	20 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	9 +0%	9 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Valorant	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	6 +0%	6 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	6 +0%	6 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
World of Tanks	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	6 +0%	6 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	16 +0%	16 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10 +0%	10 +0%
Valorant	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16 +0%	16 +0%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Fortnite	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Valorant	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%

This is how GTX 850A and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 217% faster in 1080p
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 233% faster in 1440p
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 200% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.73	7.57
Recency	17 March 2014	15 August 2020
Chip lithography	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	28 Watt

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs has a 177.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 60.7% lower power consumption.

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 850A in performance tests.

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