Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) vs ATI Radeon 9800 PRO

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon 9800 PRO with Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), including specs and performance data.

ATI 9800 PRO
2003
128 MB DDR, 47 Watt
0.15

Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) outperforms ATI 9800 PRO by a whopping 3487% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1430624
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.2214.94
ArchitectureRage 8 (2002−2007)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameR350Ice Lake G7 Gen. 11
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 March 2003 (21 year ago)28 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 coresno data64
Core clock speed380 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1100 MHz
Number of transistors117 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology150 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)47 Watt12-25 Watt
Texture fill rate3.040no data
ROPs8no data
TMUs8no 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).

InterfaceAGP 8xno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x Molexno 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 typeDDRDDR4
Maximum RAM amount128 MBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed340 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth21.76 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Videono data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0 (9_0)12_1
OpenGL2.0no data
OpenCLN/Ano data
VulkanN/A-

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 HD0−118

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 15
+0%
15
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 12
+0%
12
+0%
Battlefield 5 18
+0%
18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Fortnite 32
+0%
32
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 13
+0%
13
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 16
+0%
16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 39
+0%
39
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 30
+0%
30
+0%
Far Cry 5 10
+0%
10
+0%
Fortnite 25
+0%
25
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
+0%
9
+0%
Metro Exodus 5
+0%
5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18
+0%
18
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Far Cry 5 11
+0%
11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
+0%
9
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 15
+0%
15
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.15 5.38
Recency 1 March 2003 28 May 2019
Chip lithography 150 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 47 Watt 12 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) has a 3486.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, a 1400% more advanced lithography process, and 291.7% lower power consumption.

The Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 9800 PRO in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon 9800 PRO is a desktop card while Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) is a notebook one.

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.


ATI Radeon 9800 PRO
Radeon 9800 PRO
Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)

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.


3.6 59 votes

Rate Radeon 9800 PRO on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 241 vote

Rate Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon 9800 PRO or Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.