Iris Xe Graphics MAX vs HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) with Iris Xe Graphics MAX, including specs and performance data.
Graphics MAX outperforms HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) by a whopping 1245% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1368 | 708 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 13.68 |
| Architecture | Gen. 6 Sandy Bridge (2011) | Generation 12.1 (2020−2021) |
| GPU code name | Sandy Bridge | DG1 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 May 2011 (15 years ago) | 31 October 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 cores | 6 | 768 |
| Core clock speed | 350 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | 1650 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 32 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 25 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 79.20 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 2.534 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 24 |
| TMUs | no data | 48 |
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 | no data | PCIe 4.0 x4 |
| Width | no data | IGP |
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 | no data | LPDDR4X |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64/128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 4.3 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 68.26 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | no 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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2 |
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 HD | 7
−1186%
| 90−95
+1186%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1100%
|
12−14
+1100%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1100%
|
12−14
+1100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1150%
|
50−55
+1150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−1186%
|
90−95
+1186%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−1054%
|
300−310
+1054%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 10
−1200%
|
130−140
+1200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1100%
|
12−14
+1100%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−1200%
|
130−140
+1200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1150%
|
50−55
+1150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−1186%
|
90−95
+1186%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−1200%
|
65−70
+1200%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−1054%
|
300−310
+1054%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1100%
|
12−14
+1100%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−1200%
|
130−140
+1200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1150%
|
50−55
+1150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−1186%
|
90−95
+1186%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−1200%
|
65−70
+1200%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−1054%
|
300−310
+1054%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−1233%
|
40−45
+1233%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−1150%
|
50−55
+1150%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−1100%
|
12−14
+1100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−1100%
|
12−14
+1100%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−1186%
|
180−190
+1186%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−1100%
|
24−27
+1100%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−1100%
|
12−14
+1100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1100%
|
24−27
+1100%
|
This is how HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) and Iris Xe Graphics MAX compete in popular games:
- Iris Xe Graphics MAX is 1186% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.33 | 4.44 |
| Recency | 1 May 2011 | 31 October 2020 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 10 nm |
Iris Xe Graphics MAX has a 1245% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 220% more advanced lithography process.
The Iris Xe Graphics MAX is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) in performance tests.
Be aware that HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) is a notebook graphics card while Iris Xe Graphics MAX is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
