Radeon 760M vs Iris Xe MAX Graphics

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Xe MAX Graphics and Radeon 760M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Iris Xe MAX Graphics
2020
4 GB LPDDR4X, 25 Watt
5.13

760M outperforms Iris Xe MAX Graphics by a whopping 190% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking626357
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency14.1568.29
ArchitectureGeneration 12.1 (2020−2021)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameDG1Hawx Point
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date31 October 2020 (4 years ago)6 December 2023 (1 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 cores768512
Core clock speed300 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speed1650 MHz2599 MHz
Number of transistorsno data25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate79.2083.17
Floating-point processing power2.534 TFLOPS5.323 TFLOPS
ROPs2416
TMUs4832
Ray Tracing Coresno 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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x4PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeLPDDR4XSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed2133 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth68.26 GB/sno data
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 outputsPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.1
Vulkan1.21.3

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 MAX Graphics 5.13
Radeon 760M 14.86
+190%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Iris Xe MAX Graphics 1971
Radeon 760M 5711
+190%

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 MAX Graphics 8214
Radeon 760M 9603
+16.9%

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 MAX Graphics 6333
+3.1%
Radeon 760M 6142

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Iris Xe MAX Graphics 36993
Radeon 760M 41767
+12.9%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Iris Xe MAX Graphics 1743
Radeon 760M 2116
+21.4%

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
−14.8%
31
+14.8%
1440p20
+5.3%
19
−5.3%
4K16
−181%
45−50
+181%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
−127%
25
+127%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
−173%
30
+173%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−220%
45−50
+220%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
−136%
26
+136%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
−71.4%
12
+71.4%
Forza Horizon 4 39
−30.8%
51
+30.8%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
−290%
35−40
+290%
Metro Exodus 23
−78.3%
40−45
+78.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 33
−9.1%
35−40
+9.1%
Valorant 29
−107%
60−65
+107%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−220%
45−50
+220%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
−63.6%
18
+63.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
−50%
9
+50%
Dota 2 27
+17.4%
23
−17.4%
Far Cry 5 29
+0%
29
+0%
Fortnite 30−33
−177%
80−85
+177%
Forza Horizon 4 33
−33.3%
44
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
−290%
35−40
+290%
Grand Theft Auto V 20
−70%
34
+70%
Metro Exodus 18
−128%
40−45
+128%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−149%
100−110
+149%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9
−300%
35−40
+300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−165%
45−50
+165%
Valorant 15
−300%
60−65
+300%
World of Tanks 80−85
−130%
190−200
+130%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−220%
45−50
+220%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
−63.6%
18
+63.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
−164%
27−30
+164%
Dota 2 38
−42.1%
50−55
+42.1%
Far Cry 5 42
−31%
55−60
+31%
Forza Horizon 4 29
−27.6%
37
+27.6%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
−290%
35−40
+290%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−149%
100−110
+149%
Valorant 14−16
−300%
60−65
+300%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 5−6
−340%
21−24
+340%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
−340%
21−24
+340%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−300%
130−140
+300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−225%
12−14
+225%
World of Tanks 35−40
−181%
100−110
+181%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−120%
10−12
+120%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−227%
35−40
+227%
Forza Horizon 4 20
−85%
35−40
+85%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
−229%
21−24
+229%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−700%
30−35
+700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−150%
20−22
+150%
Valorant 14−16
−164%
35−40
+164%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
−52.9%
24−27
+52.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−62.5%
24−27
+62.5%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−193%
40−45
+193%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−62.5%
24−27
+62.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
−250%
14−16
+250%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Dota 2 20
−30%
24−27
+30%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−217%
18−20
+217%
Fortnite 4−5
−325%
16−18
+325%
Forza Horizon 4 11
−90.9%
21−24
+90.9%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
−267%
10−12
+267%
Valorant 5−6
−220%
16−18
+220%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

This is how Iris Xe MAX Graphics and Radeon 760M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 760M is 15% faster in 1080p
  • Iris Xe MAX Graphics is 5% faster in 1440p
  • Radeon 760M is 181% faster in 4K

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

  • in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Xe MAX Graphics is 17% faster.
  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 760M is 900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Iris Xe MAX Graphics is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • Radeon 760M is ahead in 59 tests (92%)
  • there's a draw in 4 tests (6%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.13 14.86
Recency 31 October 2020 6 December 2023
Chip lithography 10 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 15 Watt

Radeon 760M has a 189.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 150% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 760M is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe MAX Graphics in performance tests.


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 MAX Graphics
Iris Xe MAX Graphics
AMD Radeon 760M
Radeon 760M

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.


3.1 273 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 218 votes

Rate Radeon 760M 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.