FirePro D700 vs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs with FirePro D700, including specs and performance data.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
2020
28 Watt
9.09

D700 outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by an impressive 53% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking484378
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency22.633.53
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeTahiti
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date15 August 2020 (4 years ago)18 January 2014 (11 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 cores962048
Core clock speed400 MHz850 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt274 Watt
Texture fill rateno data108.8
Floating-point processing powerno data3.482 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data128

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 3.0 x16
Lengthno data279 mm
Widthno data2-slot

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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data6 GB
Memory bus widthno data384 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1370 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data263.0 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 data6x mini-DisplayPort, 1x SDI

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.

DirectX12_112 (11_1)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
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 HD27
−48.1%
40−45
+48.1%
1440p16
−50%
24−27
+50%
4K12
−50%
18−20
+50%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 26
−34.6%
35−40
+34.6%
Counter-Strike 2 15
−40%
21−24
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 19
−42.1%
27−30
+42.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 18
−50%
27−30
+50%
Battlefield 5 41
−46.3%
60−65
+46.3%
Counter-Strike 2 13
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
−50%
24−27
+50%
Far Cry 5 26
−34.6%
35−40
+34.6%
Fortnite 30
−50%
45−50
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−44.7%
55−60
+44.7%
Forza Horizon 5 22
−36.4%
30−33
+36.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−45.2%
45−50
+45.2%
Valorant 124
−45.2%
180−190
+45.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12
−50%
18−20
+50%
Battlefield 5 35
−42.9%
50−55
+42.9%
Counter-Strike 2 12
−50%
18−20
+50%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 96
−45.8%
140−150
+45.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 13
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%
Dota 2 51
−47.1%
75−80
+47.1%
Far Cry 5 25
−40%
35−40
+40%
Fortnite 21
−42.9%
30−33
+42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−44.7%
55−60
+44.7%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
−36.4%
30−33
+36.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 17
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%
Metro Exodus 15
−40%
21−24
+40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−45.2%
45−50
+45.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
−50%
45−50
+50%
Valorant 112
−51.8%
170−180
+51.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30
−50%
45−50
+50%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−50%
24−27
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%
Dota 2 47
−48.9%
70−75
+48.9%
Far Cry 5 23
−52.2%
35−40
+52.2%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−44.7%
55−60
+44.7%
Forza Horizon 5 22
−36.4%
30−33
+36.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−45.2%
45−50
+45.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
−50%
21−24
+50%
Valorant 23
−52.2%
35−40
+52.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 15
−40%
21−24
+40%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
−51.5%
100−105
+51.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 7
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−47.7%
65−70
+47.7%
Valorant 95−100
−44.3%
140−150
+44.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
−50%
30−33
+50%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Far Cry 5 16
−50%
24−27
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−42.9%
30−33
+42.9%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
−40%
21−24
+40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
−50%
27−30
+50%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 8
−50%
12−14
+50%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
−50%
18−20
+50%
Valorant 45−50
−44.4%
65−70
+44.4%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Dota 2 20
−50%
30−33
+50%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−50%
21−24
+50%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%

This is how Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs and FirePro D700 compete in popular games:

  • FirePro D700 is 48% faster in 1080p
  • FirePro D700 is 50% faster in 1440p
  • FirePro D700 is 50% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.09 13.87
Recency 15 August 2020 18 January 2014
Chip lithography 10 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 274 Watt

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs has an age advantage of 6 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 878.6% lower power consumption.

FirePro D700, on the other hand, has a 52.6% higher aggregate performance score.

The FirePro D700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is a notebook card while FirePro D700 is a workstation one.

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 Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
AMD FirePro D700
FirePro D700

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 1005 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 38 votes

Rate FirePro D700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs or FirePro D700, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.