Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile vs Iris Xe Graphics G7

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Xe Graphics G7 with RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Iris Xe Graphics G7
2020
10.93
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile
2024
4 GB GDDR6, 35 Watt
27.29
+150%

Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 by a whopping 150% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking425202
Place by popularity26not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data53.48
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeAD107
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date15 August 2020 (4 years ago)26 February 2024 (less than a year 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 speedno data1485 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2025 MHz
Number of transistorsno data18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data35 Watt
Texture fill rateno data129.6
Floating-point processing powerno data8.294 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data64
Tensor Coresno data64
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8

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 typeDDR4GDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data128.0 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 dataPortable Device Dependent

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

DirectXDirectX 12_112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-8.9

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. 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 10.93
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 27.29
+150%

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 6710
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 20239
+202%

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 4820
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 14136
+193%

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

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−140%
60−65
+140%
Battlefield 5 30−35
−135%
80−85
+135%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
−127%
50−55
+127%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−140%
60−65
+140%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
−133%
70−75
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−139%
170−180
+139%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
−141%
140−150
+141%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
−133%
70−75
+133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
−143%
85−90
+143%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−140%
60−65
+140%
Battlefield 5 30−35
−135%
80−85
+135%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
−127%
50−55
+127%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−140%
60−65
+140%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
−133%
70−75
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−139%
170−180
+139%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
−141%
140−150
+141%
Metro Exodus 35−40
−143%
85−90
+143%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
−133%
70−75
+133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
−143%
85−90
+143%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−132%
65−70
+132%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−140%
60−65
+140%
Battlefield 5 30−35
−135%
80−85
+135%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−140%
60−65
+140%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
−133%
70−75
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−139%
170−180
+139%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−132%
65−70
+132%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−127%
50−55
+127%
Metro Exodus 16−18
−119%
35−40
+119%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
−122%
40−45
+122%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
−133%
35−40
+133%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Battlefield 5 21−24
−138%
50−55
+138%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−125%
27−30
+125%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
−119%
35−40
+119%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−145%
120−130
+145%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
−129%
110−120
+129%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.93 27.29
Recency 15 August 2020 26 February 2024
Chip lithography 10 nm 5 nm

Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile has a 149.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Xe Graphics G7 is a notebook graphics card while RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 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
Iris Xe Graphics G7
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile

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.


3.5 2541 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 18 votes

Rate RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 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.