Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs Radeon 620
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon 620 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs outperforms 620 by a whopping 215% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 847 | 532 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 73 |
| Power efficiency | 3.31 | 18.65 |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 24 | Tiger Lake Xe |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 13 May 2019 (5 years ago) | 15 August 2020 (4 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 | 384 | 80 |
| Core clock speed | 730 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1024 MHz | 1350 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,550 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 28 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 24.58 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.7864 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 8 | no data |
| TMUs | 24 | no data |
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 | PCIe 3.0 x8 | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no 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 type | DDR3 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | no 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 Connectors | No outputs | no data |
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 | 12 (12_0) | 12_1 |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | - |
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.
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.
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 HD | 6−7
−217%
| 19
+217%
|
| 1440p | 3−4
−233%
| 10
+233%
|
| 4K | 4−5
−275%
| 15
+275%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
−37.5%
|
11
+37.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
−133%
|
14
+133%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−380%
|
24−27
+380%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
−50%
|
12
+50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
−100%
|
12
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−150%
|
30
+150%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−1300%
|
14
+1300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−800%
|
27
+800%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 9−10
−133%
|
21−24
+133%
|
| Valorant | 0−1 | 18 |
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−380%
|
24−27
+380%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
−25%
|
10
+25%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+20%
|
5
−20%
|
| Dota 2 | 6−7
−267%
|
22
+267%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
−73.3%
|
26
+73.3%
|
| Fortnite | 12−14
−246%
|
45−50
+246%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−100%
|
24
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−1700%
|
18−20
+1700%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 6−7
−117%
|
13
+117%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−467%
|
17
+467%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
−165%
|
60−65
+165%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 9−10
+50%
|
6
−50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
−130%
|
21−24
+130%
|
| Valorant | 0−1 | 14 |
| World of Tanks | 40−45
−161%
|
110−120
+161%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−380%
|
24−27
+380%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9
+12.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+50%
|
4
−50%
|
| Dota 2 | 6−7
−500%
|
36
+500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
−120%
|
30−35
+120%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−66.7%
|
20
+66.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−800%
|
9
+800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
−165%
|
60−65
+165%
|
| Valorant | 0−1 | 27−30 |
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 0−1 | 6 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2
−500%
|
6
+500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
−150%
|
40−45
+150%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2
−500%
|
6−7
+500%
|
| World of Tanks | 16−18
−244%
|
55−60
+244%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−1300%
|
14−16
+1300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+417%
|
6
−417%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−129%
|
16−18
+129%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 16 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−450%
|
10−12
+450%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−100%
|
10
+100%
|
| Valorant | 8−9
−138%
|
18−20
+138%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−12.5%
|
18−20
+12.5%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−20%
|
18−20
+20%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−214%
|
21−24
+214%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−20%
|
18−20
+20%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−350%
|
9−10
+350%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−600%
|
7−8
+600%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 5−6 |
| Valorant | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
This is how Radeon 620 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:
- Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 217% faster in 1080p
- Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 233% faster in 1440p
- Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 275% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 620 is 417% faster.
- in Forza Horizon 5, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 1700% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Radeon 620 is ahead in 4 tests (7%)
- Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is ahead in 47 tests (81%)
- there's a draw in 7 tests (12%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.40 | 7.57 |
| Recency | 13 May 2019 | 15 August 2020 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 28 Watt |
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs has a 215.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 78.6% lower power consumption.
The Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 620 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
