Radeon 660M vs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
2020
9.03

Radeon 660M outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by 8% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking446422
Place by popularity68not in top-100
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)RDNA 2 (2020−2022)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeRDNA 2 Rembrandt
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 August 2020 (3 years ago)4 January 2022 (2 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores96384
Core clock speed400 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1350 MHz1900 MHz
Number of transistorsno data13,100 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rateno data45.60

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs and Radeon 660M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 dataSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountno dataSystem Shared
Memory bus widthno dataSystem Shared
Memory clock speedno dataSystem Shared
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 dataNo 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 compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.0
Vulkanno data1.2

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 9.03
Radeon 660M 9.76
+8.1%

Radeon 660M outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by 8% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 24384
+5%
Radeon 660M 23222

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs outperforms Radeon 660M by 5% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 6504
Radeon 660M 6652
+2.3%

Radeon 660M outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by 2% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 5119
+8.1%
Radeon 660M 4735

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs outperforms Radeon 660M by 8% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 26851
Radeon 660M 30130
+12.2%

Radeon 660M outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by 12% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 207909
Radeon 660M 283076
+36.2%

Radeon 660M outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by 36% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

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 HD26
+4%
25
−4%
1440p16
+0%
16−18
+0%
4K12
+0%
12−14
+0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 20
−20%
24
+20%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 22
+10%
20−22
−10%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21
−23.8%
26
+23.8%
Battlefield 5 41
+24.2%
30−35
−24.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27
+3.8%
24−27
−3.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
−25%
20
+25%
Far Cry 5 26
−15.4%
30
+15.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 29
−10.3%
32
+10.3%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−6.3%
30−35
+6.3%
Hitman 3 39
+11.4%
35
−11.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21
+5%
20−22
−5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27
+58.8%
16−18
−58.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 22
−18.2%
26
+18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 22
−18.2%
26
+18.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 19
−5.3%
20−22
+5.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18
−5.6%
19
+5.6%
Battlefield 5 35
+6.1%
30−35
−6.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
−8.3%
24−27
+8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 13
−7.7%
14
+7.7%
Far Cry 5 25
−4%
26
+4%
Far Cry New Dawn 27
−7.4%
29
+7.4%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−6.3%
30−35
+6.3%
Hitman 3 34
+127%
15
−127%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18
−11.1%
20−22
+11.1%
Metro Exodus 15
+0%
15
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8
−113%
16−18
+113%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20
+0%
20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
+20%
25
−20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14
−57.1%
22
+57.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14
−42.9%
20−22
+42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
Battlefield 5 30
−10%
30−35
+10%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
−36.4%
14−16
+36.4%
Far Cry 5 23
−13%
26
+13%
Far Cry New Dawn 24
−12.5%
27
+12.5%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−6.3%
30−35
+6.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
−7.1%
15
+7.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
−6.3%
16−18
+6.3%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Hitman 3 21
+40%
14−16
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 13
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
Metro Exodus 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 11
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Battlefield 5 14−16
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
+40%
5−6
−40%
Far Cry 5 16
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−6.3%
16−18
+6.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Hitman 3 11
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3
−167%
8−9
+167%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

This is how Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs and Radeon 660M compete in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 4% faster than Radeon 660M in 1080p
  • Radeon 660M is 0% faster than Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs in 1440p
  • Radeon 660M is 0% faster than Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Hitman 3, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 127% faster than the Radeon 660M.
  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 660M is 167% faster than the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is ahead in 14 tests (21%)
  • Radeon 660M is ahead in 44 tests (65%)
  • there's a draw in 10 tests (15%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.03 9.76
Recency 15 August 2020 4 January 2022
Chip lithography 10 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 45 Watt

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs and Radeon 660M.


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 Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
AMD Radeon 660M
Radeon 660M

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.


3.6 802 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 220 votes

Rate Radeon 660M 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.