Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs GeForce2 Go

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GeForce2 Go GeForce2 Go 100 GeForce2 Go 200 410 Go 420 Go 440 Go 448 Go 460 Go 488 Go 4200 Go Go 4200
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G1 Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G4 Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) Xe 750 32EUs Xe G1 Xe G4 48EUs

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce2 Go and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GeForce2 Go
2000
64 MB DDR, 2 Watt
0.01

Graphics G7 80EUs outperforms by a whopping 71800% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
GeForce2 Go GeForce2 Go
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1578584
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.3819.72
ArchitectureCelsius (1999−2005)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameNV11 B2Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date11 November 2000 (25 years ago)15 August 2020 (5 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 coresno data80
Core clock speed143 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1350 MHz
Number of transistors20 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology180 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)2 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate0.57no data
ROPs2no data
TMUs4no 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).

InterfaceAGP 4xno 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 typeDDRno data
Maximum RAM amount64 MBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed166 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth5.312 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno data+

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

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.

DirectX7.012_1
OpenGL1.2no data
OpenCLN/Ano data
VulkanN/A-

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-0−119
1440p-0−19
4K-0−114

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 31
+0%
31
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+0%
14
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24
+0%
24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
+0%
12
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 20
+0%
20
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 23
+0%
23
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12
+0%
12
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Dota 2 39
+0%
39
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 19
+0%
19
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 20
+0%
20
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14
+0%
14
+0%
Metro Exodus 12
+0%
12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+0%
22
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 23
+0%
23
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+0%
9
+0%
Dota 2 36
+0%
36
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 18
+0%
18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+0%
11
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6
+0%
6
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+0%
10
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16
+0%
16
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.01 7.19
Recency 11 November 2000 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 180 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 2 Watt 28 Watt

GeForce2 Go has 1300% lower power consumption.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, on the other hand, has a 71800% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 19 years, and a 1700% more advanced lithography process.

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce2 Go in performance tests.

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 GeForce2 Go
GeForce2 Go
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

GeForce2 Go GeForce2 Go
vs
ATI Rage Mobility 128 Rage Mobility 128
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
vs
GTX 860M GeForce GTX 860M
GeForce2 Go GeForce2 Go
vs
ATI IGP 320M Radeon IGP 320M
GeForce2 Go 200 NVIDIA Go 200
vs
UHD Graphics Xe G1 Xe G1
GeForce2 Go 200 NVIDIA Go 200
vs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs G7 80EUs
GeForce2 Go 200 NVIDIA Go 200
vs
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs Xe G4 48EUs
GeForce2 Go 200 NVIDIA Go 200
vs
UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs Xe 750 32EUs
GeForce2 Go 200 NVIDIA Go 200
vs
UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
FireStream 9370 FireStream 9370
vs
Graphics Graphics
FireStream 9350 FireStream 9350
vs
H100 PCIe 96 GB 96 GB
FireStream 9270 FireStream 9270
vs
GeForce2 MX + nForce 420 + nForce 420
FireStream 9170 FireStream 9170
vs
RTX 3060 Ti GDDR6X 3060 Ti GDDR6X
Stream Processor Stream Processor
vs
RX 6600 XT 6600 XT

Community ratings

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

2.8 6 votes

Rate GeForce2 Go on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 1094 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce2 Go or Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.