Radeon RX 6900 XT vs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs with Radeon RX 6900 XT, including specs and performance data.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
2020
28 Watt
9.09

RX 6900 XT outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by a whopping 656% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking48628
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data29.99
Power efficiency22.5315.90
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeNavi 21
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date15 August 2020 (4 years ago)28 October 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores965120
Core clock speed400 MHz1825 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHz2250 MHz
Number of transistorsno data26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rateno data720.0
Floating-point processing powerno data23.04 TFLOPS
ROPsno data128
TMUsno data320
Ray Tracing Coresno data80

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 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data3-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data16 GB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data512.0 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 data1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C
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.

DirectX12_112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.1
Vulkan-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.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 9.09
RX 6900 XT 68.70
+656%

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.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 6504
RX 6900 XT 59119
+809%

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.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 5139
RX 6900 XT 50587
+884%

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
−619%
194
+619%
1440p16
−744%
135
+744%
4K12
−617%
86
+617%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data5.15
1440pno data7.40
4Kno data11.62

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 26
−665%
190−200
+665%
Counter-Strike 2 15
−1000%
160−170
+1000%
Cyberpunk 2077 19
−747%
160−170
+747%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 18
−1006%
190−200
+1006%
Battlefield 5 41
−376%
195
+376%
Counter-Strike 2 13
−1169%
160−170
+1169%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
−906%
160−170
+906%
Far Cry 5 26
−569%
170−180
+569%
Fortnite 30
−907%
300−350
+907%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−645%
283
+645%
Forza Horizon 5 22
−750%
180−190
+750%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−471%
170−180
+471%
Valorant 124
−191%
350−400
+191%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12
−1558%
190−200
+1558%
Battlefield 5 35
−460%
196
+460%
Counter-Strike 2 12
−1275%
160−170
+1275%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 96
−190%
270−280
+190%
Cyberpunk 2077 13
−1138%
160−170
+1138%
Dota 2 51
−231%
160−170
+231%
Far Cry 5 25
−596%
170−180
+596%
Fortnite 21
−1338%
300−350
+1338%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−634%
279
+634%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
−750%
180−190
+750%
Grand Theft Auto V 17
−882%
160−170
+882%
Metro Exodus 15
−993%
164
+993%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−471%
170−180
+471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
−977%
323
+977%
Valorant 112
−222%
350−400
+222%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30
−557%
197
+557%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−931%
160−170
+931%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
−1364%
160−170
+1364%
Dota 2 47
−260%
160−170
+260%
Far Cry 5 23
−657%
170−180
+657%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−553%
248
+553%
Forza Horizon 5 22
−627%
160−170
+627%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−471%
170−180
+471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
−1071%
164
+1071%
Valorant 23
−1687%
411
+1687%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 15
−1913%
300−350
+1913%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
−645%
450−500
+645%
Grand Theft Auto V 7
−1829%
130−140
+1829%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−1033%
102
+1033%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−298%
170−180
+298%
Valorant 95−100
−352%
400−450
+352%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
−880%
196
+880%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
−627%
80−85
+627%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
−1200%
90−95
+1200%
Far Cry 5 16
−869%
150−160
+869%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−1000%
231
+1000%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
−633%
110−120
+633%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−1062%
150−160
+1062%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
−739%
150−160
+739%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
−743%
55−60
+743%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−1367%
40−45
+1367%
Grand Theft Auto V 8
−1850%
150−160
+1850%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−1575%
67
+1575%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
−917%
122
+917%
Valorant 45−50
−636%
300−350
+636%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
−1240%
134
+1240%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−1367%
40−45
+1367%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1367%
40−45
+1367%
Dota 2 20
−695%
150−160
+695%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−1033%
100−110
+1033%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−1057%
162
+1057%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
−650%
45−50
+650%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−1100%
95−100
+1100%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
−888%
75−80
+888%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

This is how Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs and RX 6900 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6900 XT is 619% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6900 XT is 744% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6900 XT is 617% faster in 4K

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

  • in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Epic Preset, the RX 6900 XT is 1913% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6900 XT is ahead in 63 tests (98%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.09 68.70
Recency 15 August 2020 28 October 2020
Chip lithography 10 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 300 Watt

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs has 971.4% lower power consumption.

RX 6900 XT, on the other hand, has a 655.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 months, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6900 XT 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 Radeon RX 6900 XT is a desktop 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 Radeon RX 6900 XT
Radeon RX 6900 XT

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 3899 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6900 XT 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 Radeon RX 6900 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.