GeForce 9400M vs Iris Xe Graphics G7

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Xe Graphics G7 and GeForce 9400M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Iris Xe Graphics G7
2020
10.05
+3765%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 outperforms 9400M by a whopping 3765% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4471362
Place by popularity17not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data1.52
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeC79
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 August 2020 (4 years ago)15 October 2008 (16 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 cores9616
Core clock speedno data580 MHz
Number of transistorsno data314 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data12 Watt
Texture fill rateno data4.640
Floating-point processing powerno data0.0448 TFLOPS
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data8

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 2.0 x16

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 typeDDR4System 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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX 12_111.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data3.3
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+4100%
1−2
−4100%
Far Cry 5 30−35 0−1
Fortnite 55−60
+5700%
1−2
−5700%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+4100%
1−2
−4100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35 0−1
Valorant 90−95
+4500%
2−3
−4500%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+4100%
1−2
−4100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+4767%
3−4
−4767%
Dota 2 65−70
+6800%
1−2
−6800%
Far Cry 5 30−35 0−1
Fortnite 55−60
+5700%
1−2
−5700%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+4100%
1−2
−4100%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40 0−1
Metro Exodus 18−20 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27 0−1
Valorant 90−95
+4500%
2−3
−4500%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+4100%
1−2
−4100%
Dota 2 65−70
+6800%
1−2
−6800%
Far Cry 5 30−35 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+4100%
1−2
−4100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+5700%
1−2
−5700%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+7300%
1−2
−7300%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16 0−1
Metro Exodus 10−12 0−1
Valorant 100−110
+5300%
2−3
−5300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27 0−1
Far Cry 5 20−22 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 21−24 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 20−22 0−1

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 20−22 0−1
Metro Exodus 5−6 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12 0−1
Valorant 50−55
+5000%
1−2
−5000%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14 0−1
Dota 2 35−40 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 16−18 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.05 0.26
Recency 15 August 2020 15 October 2008
Chip lithography 10 nm 65 nm

Iris Xe Graphics G7 has a 3765.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 550% more advanced lithography process.

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9400M in performance tests.

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
Iris Xe Graphics G7
NVIDIA GeForce 9400M
GeForce 9400M

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.


3.5 2674 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 44 votes

Rate GeForce 9400M 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 or GeForce 9400M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.