Radeon PRO WX 2100 vs Iris Xe Graphics G7
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Iris Xe Graphics G7 with Radeon PRO WX 2100, including specs and performance data.
Iris Xe Graphics G7 outperforms PRO WX 2100 by a whopping 109% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 488 | 688 |
| Place by popularity | 18 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.99 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 9.72 |
| Architecture | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) |
| GPU code name | Tiger Lake Xe | Lexa |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 15 August 2020 (5 years ago) | 4 June 2017 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $149 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 925 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1219 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 2,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 10 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 35 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 39.01 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 1.248 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 16 |
| TMUs | no data | 32 |
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).
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Length | no data | 168 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 48 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | 1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | - | + |
| Quick Sync | + | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX 12_1 | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2.131 |
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
+133%
|
18−20
−133%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−33
+114%
|
14−16
−114%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+111%
|
27−30
−111%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+95.2%
|
21−24
−95.2%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+88.9%
|
18−20
−88.9%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+56.9%
|
55−60
−56.9%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+133%
|
18−20
−133%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 140−150
+81%
|
75−80
−81%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+74.4%
|
35−40
−74.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−33
+114%
|
14−16
−114%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+111%
|
27−30
−111%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+95.2%
|
21−24
−95.2%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35−40
+133%
|
14−16
−133%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+138%
|
8−9
−138%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+88.9%
|
18−20
−88.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+84.6%
|
12−14
−84.6%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+56.9%
|
55−60
−56.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+133%
|
18−20
−133%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+74.4%
|
35−40
−74.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−33
+114%
|
14−16
−114%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+95.2%
|
21−24
−95.2%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+88.9%
|
18−20
−88.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+84.6%
|
12−14
−84.6%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 55−60
+111%
|
27−30
−111%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 70−75
+106%
|
35−40
−106%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+225%
|
4−5
−225%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−11
+233%
|
3−4
−233%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+112%
|
45−50
−112%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+667%
|
3−4
−667%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 20−22
+150%
|
8−9
−150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+100%
|
10−12
−100%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 20−22
+122%
|
9−10
−122%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
+23.5%
|
16−18
−23.5%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+113%
|
21−24
−113%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+133%
|
14−16
−133%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+167%
|
6−7
−167%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| God of War | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| God of War | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| God of War | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| God of War | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| God of War | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| God of War | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 is 1000% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Iris Xe Graphics G7 performs better in 40 tests (66%)
- there's a draw in 21 tests (34%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.30 | 4.46 |
| Recency | 15 August 2020 | 4 June 2017 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 14 nm |
Iris Xe Graphics G7 has a 108.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.
The Iris Xe Graphics G7 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon PRO WX 2100 in performance tests.
Be aware that Iris Xe Graphics G7 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon PRO WX 2100 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
