Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs Iris Pro Graphics P6300

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Pro Graphics P6300 with Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, including specs and performance data.

Iris Pro Graphics P6300
2014
15 Watt
4.14

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs outperforms Iris Pro Graphics P6300 by an impressive 83% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking684525
Place by popularitynot in top-10048
Power efficiency19.1818.79
ArchitectureGeneration 8.0 (2014−2015)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameBroadwell GT3eTiger Lake Xe
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date5 September 2014 (10 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 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 cores38480
Core clock speed300 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed800 MHz1350 MHz
Number of transistors189 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate38.40no data
Floating-point processing power0.6144 TFLOPSno data
ROPs6no data
TMUs48no 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).

InterfaceIGPno data
WidthIGPno 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 typeSystem Sharedno data
Maximum RAM amountSystem Sharedno data
Memory bus widthSystem Sharedno data
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno data
Shared memoryno data+

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 outputsno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_1)12_1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.4no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.1.80-

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 HD10−12
−90%
19
+90%
1440p5−6
−100%
10
+100%
4K7−8
−100%
14
+100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14
+0%
14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 19
+0%
19
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 13
+0%
13
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hitman 3 16
+0%
16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 38
+0%
38
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 62
+0%
62
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16
+0%
16
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hitman 3 15
+0%
15
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 27
+0%
27
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24
+0%
24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 49
+0%
49
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8
+0%
8
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hitman 3 12
+0%
12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16
+0%
16
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20
+0%
20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+0%
11
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16
+0%
16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+0%
10
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hitman 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how Iris Pro Graphics P6300 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 90% faster in 1080p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 100% faster in 1440p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 100% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.14 7.57
Recency 5 September 2014 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 28 Watt

Iris Pro Graphics P6300 has 86.7% lower power consumption.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, on the other hand, has a 82.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 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 P6300 in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is a desktop card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is a notebook 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 Pro Graphics P6300
Iris Pro Graphics P6300
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.9 13 votes

Rate Iris Pro Graphics P6300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 901 vote

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 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.