UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs vs Radeon E8860

Place in the ranking	677	658
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	8.16	11.25
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code name	Venus	Tiger Lake Xe
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	25 January 2014 (11 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	640	48
Core clock speed	575 MHz	350 MHz
Boost clock speed	625 MHz	1450 MHz
Number of transistors	1,500 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	37 Watt	28 Watt
Texture fill rate	25.00	no data
Floating-point processing power	0.8 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	no data
TMUs	40	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 x16

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	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1125 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	72 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

4x mini-DisplayPort

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 (11_1)	12_1
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
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.

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

16−18

−6.3%

17
+6.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +0%	11 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	21 +0%	21 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Valorant	17 +0%	17 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	15 +0%	15 +0%
Far Cry 5	22 +0%	22 +0%
Fortnite	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	17 +0%	17 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	10 +0%	10 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Valorant	12 +0%	12 +0%
World of Tanks	25 +0%	25 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	24 +0%	24 +0%
Far Cry 5	14 +0%	14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	16 +0%	16 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Valorant	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
World of Tanks	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

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

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Fortnite	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Valorant	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%

This is how Radeon E8860 and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs compete in popular games:

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 6% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.22	4.40
Recency	25 January 2014	15 August 2020
Chip lithography	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	37 Watt	28 Watt

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs has a 4.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 32.1% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon E8860 and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.