Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics vs Iris Xe Graphics G7
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Iris Xe Graphics G7 and Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Iris Xe Graphics G7 outperforms HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics by a whopping 818% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 425 | 1052 |
Place by popularity | 35 | not in top-100 |
Architecture | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) | Terascale 3 (2010−2013) |
GPU code name | Tiger Lake Xe | no data |
Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
Release date | 15 August 2020 (4 years ago) | 15 May 2012 (12 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 cores | 96 | 736 |
Core clock speed | no data | 655 / 600 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 10 nm | 40 nm |
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 size | no data | medium sized |
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 type | DDR4 | no data |
Memory bus width | no data | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | no data | 1800 MHz |
Shared memory | + | + |
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.
DirectX | DirectX 12_1 | 11 |
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
+317%
|
6−7
−317%
|
Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+1033%
|
3−4
−1033%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 21−24
+450%
|
4−5
−450%
|
Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+2400%
|
1−2
−2400%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+3450%
|
2−3
−3450%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 55−60
+314%
|
14−16
−314%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−33
+1400%
|
2−3
−1400%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 35−40
+338%
|
8−9
−338%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 24−27
+317%
|
6−7
−317%
|
Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+1033%
|
3−4
−1033%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 21−24
+450%
|
4−5
−450%
|
Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+2400%
|
1−2
−2400%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+3450%
|
2−3
−3450%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 55−60
+314%
|
14−16
−314%
|
Metro Exodus | 35−40
+1067%
|
3−4
−1067%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−33
+1400%
|
2−3
−1400%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 35−40
+338%
|
8−9
−338%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+155%
|
10−12
−155%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 24−27
+317%
|
6−7
−317%
|
Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+1033%
|
3−4
−1033%
|
Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+2400%
|
1−2
−2400%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+3450%
|
2−3
−3450%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+155%
|
10−12
−155%
|
1440p
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−12
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24
+1000%
|
2−3
−1000%
|
Metro Exodus | 16−18
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 14−16
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+950%
|
2−3
−950%
|
Far Cry 5 | 12−14
+1100%
|
1−2
−1100%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 16−18
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+880%
|
5−6
−880%
|
4K
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 5−6 | 0−1 |
Horizon Zero Dawn | 45−50
+860%
|
5−6
−860%
|
Metro Exodus | 9−10 | 0−1 |
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9 | 0−1 |
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
Battlefield 5 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
Far Cry 5 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
Far Cry New Dawn | 8−9 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Watch Dogs: Legion | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
Far Cry New Dawn | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 is 3450% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Iris Xe Graphics G7 is ahead in 24 tests (51%)
- there's a draw in 23 tests (49%)
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 10.93 | 1.19 |
Recency | 15 August 2020 | 15 May 2012 |
Chip lithography | 10 nm | 40 nm |
Iris Xe Graphics G7 has a 818.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.
The Iris Xe Graphics G7 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.