Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs Iris Pro Graphics P580
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Iris Pro Graphics P580 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs outperforms Iris Pro Graphics P580 by an impressive 50% 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 | 665 | 569 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 87 |
| Power efficiency | 24.48 | 19.62 |
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 (2015−2016) | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) |
| GPU code name | Skylake GT4e | Tiger Lake Xe |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 September 2015 (9 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 cores | 576 | 80 |
| Core clock speed | 350 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | 1350 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 189 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm+ | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 28 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 75.60 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.21 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 9 | no data |
| TMUs | 72 | 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 | Ring Bus | 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 | DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 64 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | no data |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | no data |
| Shared memory | + | + |
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 | Portable Device Dependent | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | + | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12_1 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | - |
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 | 12−14
−58.3%
| 19
+58.3%
|
| 1440p | 6−7
−50%
| 9
+50%
|
| 4K | 9−10
−55.6%
| 14
+55.6%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
−40.9%
|
31
+40.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−40%
|
14
+40%
|
| God of War | 10−12
−63.6%
|
18
+63.6%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 20−22
−30%
|
26
+30%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
−9.1%
|
24
+9.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−20%
|
12
+20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
−33.3%
|
20
+33.3%
|
| Fortnite | 27−30
−55.2%
|
45−50
+55.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
−43.5%
|
30−35
+43.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 12−14
−61.5%
|
21
+61.5%
|
| God of War | 10−12
−36.4%
|
15
+36.4%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−42.1%
|
27−30
+42.1%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
−28.3%
|
75−80
+28.3%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 20−22
−15%
|
23
+15%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+83.3%
|
12
−83.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 80−85
−39.3%
|
110−120
+39.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
+7.7%
|
39
−7.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
−26.7%
|
19
+26.7%
|
| Fortnite | 27−30
−55.2%
|
45−50
+55.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
−43.5%
|
30−35
+43.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 12−14
−53.8%
|
20
+53.8%
|
| God of War | 10−12
−36.4%
|
15
+36.4%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+14.3%
|
14
−14.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12
+33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−42.1%
|
27−30
+42.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−57.1%
|
22
+57.1%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
−28.3%
|
75−80
+28.3%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 20−22
−15%
|
23
+15%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9
−11.1%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
+16.7%
|
36
−16.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
−20%
|
18
+20%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
−43.5%
|
30−35
+43.5%
|
| God of War | 10−12
−9.1%
|
12
+9.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−42.1%
|
27−30
+42.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+27.3%
|
11
−27.3%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
−28.3%
|
75−80
+28.3%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 27−30
−55.2%
|
45−50
+55.2%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
−51.4%
|
55−60
+51.4%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 5−6
−20%
|
6
+20%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
−13.9%
|
40−45
+13.9%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−54.7%
|
80−85
+54.7%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−200%
|
14−16
+200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−100%
|
6
+100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12
+33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−41.7%
|
16−18
+41.7%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−66.7%
|
10
+66.7%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 10−11
−50%
|
14−16
+50%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−5.9%
|
18−20
+5.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−500%
|
6−7
+500%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−54.2%
|
35−40
+54.2%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16
−6.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12−14
+71.4%
|
| God of War | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
This is how Iris Pro Graphics P580 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:
- Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 58% faster in 1080p
- Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 50% faster in 1440p
- Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 56% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Pro Graphics P580 is 83% faster.
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Iris Pro Graphics P580 performs better in 7 tests (11%)
- Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs performs better in 54 tests (86%)
- there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.82 | 7.21 |
| Recency | 1 September 2015 | 15 August 2020 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 28 Watt |
Iris Pro Graphics P580 has 86.7% lower power consumption.
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, on the other hand, has a 49.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.
The Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Pro Graphics P580 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
