Radeon PRO WX 2100 vs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs with Radeon PRO WX 2100, including specs and performance data.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
2020
28 Watt
9.43
+98.9%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs outperforms PRO WX 2100 by an impressive 99% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking437613
Place by popularity81not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data2.98
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)Polaris (2016−2019)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XePolaris 12
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date15 August 2020 (3 years ago)21 March 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149
Current priceno data$343 (2.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores96512
Core clock speed400 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1350 MHz1219 MHz
Number of transistorsno data2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data39.01
Floating-point performanceno data1,248 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs and Radeon PRO WX 2100 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.

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 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 dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data6000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data48 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 data1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort

Supported technologies

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

FreeSyncno data+
Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 (12_0)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.0
Vulkanno data1.2.131

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 HD26
+117%
12−14
−117%
1440p16
+100%
8−9
−100%
4K12
+100%
6−7
−100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 20 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 22 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21 no data
Battlefield 5 27−30 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 36 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 16 no data
Far Cry 5 21−24 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27 no data
Forza Horizon 4 45−50 no data
Hitman 3 24 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 46 no data
Metro Exodus 35 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 17 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 38 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 22 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 19 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18 no data
Battlefield 5 27−30 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 32 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 13 no data
Far Cry 5 21−24 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27 no data
Forza Horizon 4 45−50 no data
Hitman 3 22 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 112 no data
Metro Exodus 28 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 15 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 84 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 23 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 11 no data
Far Cry 5 21−24 no data
Forza Horizon 4 45−50 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 23 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35 no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14 no data

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 7 no data
Far Cry 5 16 no data
Forza Horizon 4 16−18 no data
Hitman 3 12−14 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22 no data
Metro Exodus 12−14 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 19
+111%
9−10
−111%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6 no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18 no data

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8 no data
Hitman 3 5−6 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12 no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 no data
Far Cry 5 5−6 no data
Forza Horizon 4 12−14 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11 no data
Metro Exodus 10−11 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4 no data

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10 no data

This is how Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs and PRO WX 2100 compete in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 117% faster in 1080p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 100% faster in 1440p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 100% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.43 4.74
Recency 15 August 2020 21 March 2018
Chip lithography 10 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 50 Watt

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon PRO WX 2100 in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is a notebook graphics card while Radeon PRO WX 2100 is a mobile workstation 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 Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100
Radeon PRO WX 2100

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.


3.6 820 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 36 votes

Rate Radeon PRO WX 2100 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.