Radeon RX 6700 XT vs Iris Pro Graphics P580
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Iris Pro Graphics P580 with Radeon RX 6700 XT, including specs and performance data.
RX 6700 XT outperforms Iris Pro Graphics P580 by a whopping 880% 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 | 81 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 99 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 49.73 |
| Power efficiency | 24.49 | 15.65 |
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 (2015−2016) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | Skylake GT4e | Navi 22 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 September 2015 (9 years ago) | 3 March 2021 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $479 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 350 MHz | 2321 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | 2581 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 189 million | 17,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm+ | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 230 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 75.60 | 413.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.21 TFLOPS | 13.21 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 9 | 64 |
| TMUs | 72 | 160 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 40 |
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 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
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 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 64 GB | 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 384.0 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 | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
| 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 and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.2 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
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 | 14−16
−957%
| 148
+957%
|
| 1440p | 8−9
−913%
| 81
+913%
|
| 4K | 4−5
−1050%
| 46
+1050%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 3.24 |
| 1440p | no data | 5.91 |
| 4K | no data | 10.41 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
−1486%
|
349
+1486%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−1090%
|
119
+1090%
|
| God of War | 10−12
−1536%
|
180
+1536%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 20−22
−640%
|
140−150
+640%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
−1477%
|
347
+1477%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−890%
|
99
+890%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
−1087%
|
178
+1087%
|
| Fortnite | 27−30
−607%
|
200−210
+607%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
−696%
|
180−190
+696%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 12−14
−1623%
|
224
+1623%
|
| God of War | 10−12
−1100%
|
132
+1100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−805%
|
170−180
+805%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
−340%
|
260−270
+340%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 20−22
−640%
|
140−150
+640%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
−836%
|
206
+836%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 80−85
−231%
|
270−280
+231%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−800%
|
90
+800%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
−317%
|
175
+317%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
−1027%
|
169
+1027%
|
| Fortnite | 27−30
−607%
|
200−210
+607%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
−696%
|
180−190
+696%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 12−14
−1438%
|
200
+1438%
|
| God of War | 10−12
−1009%
|
122
+1009%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−906%
|
161
+906%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10
−1222%
|
119
+1222%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−805%
|
170−180
+805%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−1493%
|
223
+1493%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
−340%
|
260−270
+340%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 20−22
−640%
|
140−150
+640%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−750%
|
85
+750%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
−231%
|
139
+231%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
−960%
|
159
+960%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
−696%
|
180−190
+696%
|
| God of War | 10−12
−645%
|
82
+645%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−805%
|
170−180
+805%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−807%
|
127
+807%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
−340%
|
260−270
+340%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 27−30
−607%
|
200−210
+607%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−1300%
|
126
+1300%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
−814%
|
300−350
+814%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 5−6
−1940%
|
102
+1940%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−1675%
|
71
+1675%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
−386%
|
170−180
+386%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−458%
|
290−300
+458%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−2240%
|
110−120
+2240%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1767%
|
56
+1767%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
−1422%
|
137
+1422%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−1108%
|
140−150
+1108%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−1550%
|
66
+1550%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−1533%
|
95−100
+1533%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 10−11
−1210%
|
130−140
+1210%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−500%
|
102
+500%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−7300%
|
74
+7300%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−1079%
|
280−290
+1079%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
−3800%
|
75−80
+3800%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2400%
|
25
+2400%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−524%
|
106
+524%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−1675%
|
71
+1675%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−1314%
|
95−100
+1314%
|
| God of War | 3−4
−1300%
|
42
+1300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 5−6
−1260%
|
65−70
+1260%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 32
+0%
|
32
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 43
+0%
|
43
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
This is how Iris Pro Graphics P580 and RX 6700 XT compete in popular games:
- RX 6700 XT is 957% faster in 1080p
- RX 6700 XT is 913% faster in 1440p
- RX 6700 XT is 1050% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 6700 XT is 7300% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RX 6700 XT performs better in 62 tests (95%)
- there's a draw in 3 tests (5%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.82 | 47.22 |
| Recency | 1 September 2015 | 3 March 2021 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 64 GB | 12 GB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 230 Watt |
Iris Pro Graphics P580 has a 433.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 1433.3% lower power consumption.
RX 6700 XT, on the other hand, has a 879.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 6700 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Pro Graphics P580 in performance tests.
Be aware that Iris Pro Graphics P580 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon RX 6700 XT 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.
