GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB vs Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) with GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB, including specs and performance data.

Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
2019
12 Watt
5.44

RTX 3050 6 GB outperforms Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) by a whopping 410% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking613204
Place by popularitynot in top-10021
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data75.15
Power efficiency14.9827.30
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameIce Lake G7 Gen. 11GA107
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date28 May 2019 (5 years ago)2 February 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$179

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores642304
Core clock speed300 MHz1042 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz1470 MHz
Number of transistorsno data8,700 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12-25 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rateno data105.8
Floating-point processing powerno data6.774 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data72
Tensor Coresno data72
Ray Tracing Coresno data18

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data242 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR4GDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data6 GB
Memory bus widthno data96 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data168.0 GB/s
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 Connectorsno data1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

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.

DirectX12_112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-8.6

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 HD18
−400%
90−95
+400%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data1.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−400%
65−70
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
−400%
55−60
+400%
Elden Ring 14−16
−400%
70−75
+400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−400%
85−90
+400%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−400%
65−70
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
−400%
55−60
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 21
−376%
100−105
+376%
Metro Exodus 17
−400%
85−90
+400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12
−400%
60−65
+400%
Valorant 12
−400%
60−65
+400%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−400%
85−90
+400%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−400%
65−70
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
−400%
55−60
+400%
Dota 2 16
−400%
80−85
+400%
Elden Ring 6
−400%
30−33
+400%
Far Cry 5 16
−400%
80−85
+400%
Fortnite 30−35
−400%
160−170
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 17
−400%
85−90
+400%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
−400%
45−50
+400%
Metro Exodus 12−14
−400%
65−70
+400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 48
−400%
240−250
+400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−400%
80−85
+400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−400%
85−90
+400%
Valorant 10
−400%
50−55
+400%
World of Tanks 39
−387%
190−200
+387%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−400%
85−90
+400%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−400%
65−70
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
−400%
55−60
+400%
Dota 2 28
−400%
140−150
+400%
Far Cry 5 16
−400%
80−85
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 15
−400%
75−80
+400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
−400%
230−240
+400%
Valorant 14−16
−400%
70−75
+400%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Elden Ring 6−7
−400%
30−33
+400%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−400%
170−180
+400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
World of Tanks 35−40
−387%
190−200
+387%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
−400%
45−50
+400%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−400%
45−50
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−400%
55−60
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−400%
40−45
+400%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−400%
35−40
+400%
Valorant 14−16
−400%
75−80
+400%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
−400%
85−90
+400%
Elden Ring 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−400%
85−90
+400%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−400%
80−85
+400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−400%
85−90
+400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Dota 2 16−18
−400%
85−90
+400%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−400%
30−33
+400%
Fortnite 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Valorant 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%

This is how Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) and RTX 3050 6 GB compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3050 6 GB is 400% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.44 27.76
Recency 28 May 2019 2 February 2024
Chip lithography 10 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 70 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) has 483.3% lower power consumption.

RTX 3050 6 GB, on the other hand, has a 410.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB is a desktop 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.


Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB
GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB

Other comparisons

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.


3.6 238 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 1423 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB 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.