Radeon Pro W5500M vs Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) with Radeon Pro W5500M, including specs and performance data.
Pro W5500M outperforms Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) by an impressive 67% 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 | 680 | 552 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 15.34 | 7.52 |
| Architecture | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) |
| GPU code name | Ice Lake G7 Gen. 11 | Navi 14 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 28 May 2019 (6 years ago) | 10 February 2020 (6 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 | 64 | 1408 |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | 1450 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 6,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 10 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12-25 Watt | 85 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 127.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 4.083 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 32 |
| TMUs | no data | 88 |
| L2 Cache | no data | 2 MB |
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 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | DDR4 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 192.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2.131 |
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 | 18
−66.7%
| 30−33
+66.7%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 32
−56.3%
|
50−55
+56.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−60%
|
16−18
+60%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 18
−66.7%
|
30−33
+66.7%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 28
−60.7%
|
45−50
+60.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−60%
|
16−18
+60%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12
−66.7%
|
20−22
+66.7%
|
| Fortnite | 32
−56.3%
|
50−55
+56.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 13
−61.5%
|
21−24
+61.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 15
−60%
|
24−27
+60%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−57.9%
|
30−33
+57.9%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
−61.3%
|
100−105
+61.3%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 16
−50%
|
24−27
+50%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 39
−66.7%
|
65−70
+66.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−60%
|
16−18
+60%
|
| Dota 2 | 30
−66.7%
|
50−55
+66.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10
−60%
|
16−18
+60%
|
| Fortnite | 25
−60%
|
40−45
+60%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
−52.2%
|
35−40
+52.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 14−16
−50%
|
21−24
+50%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 9
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−57.9%
|
30−33
+57.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18
−66.7%
|
30−33
+66.7%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
−61.3%
|
100−105
+61.3%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
−66.7%
|
35−40
+66.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−60%
|
16−18
+60%
|
| Dota 2 | 28
−60.7%
|
45−50
+60.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 11
−63.6%
|
18−20
+63.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
−52.2%
|
35−40
+52.2%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−57.9%
|
30−33
+57.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
−61.3%
|
100−105
+61.3%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 15
−60%
|
24−27
+60%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
−60%
|
16−18
+60%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
−66.7%
|
65−70
+66.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
−66.7%
|
60−65
+66.7%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
−63.6%
|
90−95
+63.6%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
−60%
|
16−18
+60%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−66.7%
|
20−22
+66.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−11
−60%
|
16−18
+60%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−50%
|
24−27
+50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−60%
|
40−45
+60%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−58.8%
|
27−30
+58.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
This is how Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) and Pro W5500M compete in popular games:
- Pro W5500M is 67% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.98 | 8.30 |
| Recency | 28 May 2019 | 10 February 2020 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 85 Watt |
Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) has 608% lower power consumption.
Pro W5500M, on the other hand, has a 67% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 months, and a 43% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon Pro W5500M 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 graphics card while Radeon Pro W5500M is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
