Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs NVS 310

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 310 with Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, including specs and performance data.

NVS 310
2012
512 MB DDR3, 20 Watt
0.64

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs outperforms NVS 310 by a whopping 1063% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking1151501
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGF119Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date26 June 2012 (12 years ago)15 August 2020 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$159 no data
Current price$80 (0.5x MSRP)no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores4880
Core clock speed523 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1350 MHz
Number of transistors292 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate4.184no data
Floating-point performance100.4 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on NVS 310 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length156 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount512 MBno data
Memory bus width64 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1750 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth14 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno data+

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 Connectors2x DisplayPortno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12_1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/Ano data
CUDA2.1no data

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 HD1−2
−1700%
18
+1700%
1440p0−110
4K1−2
−1400%
15
+1400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1300%
14
+1300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−1400%
14−16
+1400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−1800%
19
+1800%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−2100%
21−24
+2100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−1400%
14−16
+1400%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1200%
13
+1200%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1600%
16−18
+1600%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2000%
21−24
+2000%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−1100%
35−40
+1100%
Hitman 3 1−2
−1500%
16
+1500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−1500%
32
+1500%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−1167%
38
+1167%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−2000%
21−24
+2000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
−1400%
30
+1400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−1500%
16
+1500%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−1400%
14−16
+1400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−1500%
16
+1500%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−2100%
21−24
+2100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−1400%
14−16
+1400%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 10
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1600%
16−18
+1600%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2000%
21−24
+2000%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−1100%
35−40
+1100%
Hitman 3 1−2
−1500%
16
+1500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−1600%
30−35
+1600%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−1150%
25
+1150%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−2000%
21−24
+2000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
−1100%
24
+1100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−2100%
22
+2100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
−1125%
49
+1125%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−1400%
14−16
+1400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 9−10
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−1400%
14−16
+1400%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 8
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1600%
16−18
+1600%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−1100%
35−40
+1100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
−1500%
16
+1500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
−1900%
20
+1900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 11
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−1350%
27−30
+1350%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−2000%
21−24
+2000%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 10−12

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 7−8
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 3−4
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 9−10
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 3−4
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1100%
12
+1100%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−1200%
12−14
+1200%
Hitman 3 0−1 10−12
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
Metro Exodus 0−1 9−10
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
−1500%
16
+1500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 10
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 4−5

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−1200%
12−14
+1200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 6−7
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 5−6
Hitman 3 0−1 4−5
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 8−9
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 3−4
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 4−5

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 4−5
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 3−4
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 3−4
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 1−2
Far Cry 5 0−1 4−5
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 8−9
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 8−9
Metro Exodus 0−1 8−9
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 2−3

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 7−8

This is how NVS 310 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 1700% faster in 1080p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 1400% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.64 7.44
Recency 26 June 2012 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 40 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 28 Watt

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 310 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 310 is a workstation card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is a notebook 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.


NVIDIA NVS 310
NVS 310
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs

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.


3.4 65 votes

Rate NVS 310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 818 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 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.