Iris Xe MAX Graphics vs Radeon HD 6990M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 6990M and Iris Xe MAX Graphics, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
HD 6990M outperforms Iris Xe MAX Graphics by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 668 | 674 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Power efficiency | 3.63 | 14.32 |
Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Generation 12.1 (2020−2021) |
GPU code name | Blackcomb | DG1 |
Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
Release date | 12 July 2011 (14 years ago) | 31 October 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 | 1120 | 768 |
Core clock speed | 715 MHz | 300 MHz |
Boost clock speed | no data | 1650 MHz |
Number of transistors | 1,700 million | no data |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 10 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 25 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 40.04 | 79.20 |
Floating-point processing power | 1.602 TFLOPS | 2.534 TFLOPS |
ROPs | 32 | 24 |
TMUs | 56 | 48 |
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).
Laptop size | large | no data |
Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 4.0 x4 |
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 | GDDR5 | LPDDR4X |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 2133 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 115.2 GB/s | 68.26 GB/s |
Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.4 |
OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
Vulkan | N/A | 1.2 |
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.
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.
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:
900p | 54
+8%
| 50−55
−8%
|
Full HD | 60
+122%
| 27
−122%
|
1440p | 18−21
−11.1%
| 20
+11.1%
|
4K | 16−18
+0%
| 16
+0%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Battlefield 5 | 20−22
−90%
|
38
+90%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 14−16
−73.3%
|
26
+73.3%
|
Fortnite | 27−30
−17.2%
|
34
+17.2%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+4.5%
|
21−24
−4.5%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
Valorant | 60−65
+1.7%
|
60−65
−1.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Battlefield 5 | 20−22
−75%
|
35
+75%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 80−85
+1.2%
|
80−85
−1.2%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Dota 2 | 40−45
+2.5%
|
40
−2.5%
|
Far Cry 5 | 14−16
−66.7%
|
25
+66.7%
|
Fortnite | 27−30
−6.9%
|
31
+6.9%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+4.5%
|
21−24
−4.5%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−25%
|
20
+25%
|
Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 9−10
−100%
|
18
+100%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−143%
|
34
+143%
|
Valorant | 60−65
+1.7%
|
60−65
−1.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Battlefield 5 | 20−22
−65%
|
33
+65%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Dota 2 | 40−45
+7.9%
|
38
−7.9%
|
Far Cry 5 | 14−16
−60%
|
24
+60%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+4.5%
|
21−24
−4.5%
|
Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−28.6%
|
18
+28.6%
|
Valorant | 60−65
+1.7%
|
60−65
−1.7%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
Fortnite | 27−30
+31.8%
|
22
−31.8%
|
1440p
High Preset
Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
+2.8%
|
35−40
−2.8%
|
Grand Theft Auto V | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Valorant | 50−55
+1.9%
|
50−55
−1.9%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
Fortnite | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−1000%
|
11
+1000%
|
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 | 16−18
−17.6%
|
20
+17.6%
|
Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
Fortnite | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
This is how HD 6990M and Iris Xe MAX Graphics compete in popular games:
- HD 6990M is 8% faster in 900p
- HD 6990M is 122% faster in 1080p
- Iris Xe MAX Graphics is 11% faster in 1440p
- A tie in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD 6990M is 33% faster.
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Xe MAX Graphics is 1000% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD 6990M performs better in 18 tests (30%)
- Iris Xe MAX Graphics performs better in 14 tests (23%)
- there's a draw in 29 tests (48%)
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 4.77 | 4.70 |
Recency | 12 July 2011 | 31 October 2020 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
Chip lithography | 40 nm | 10 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 25 Watt |
HD 6990M has a 1.5% higher aggregate performance score.
Iris Xe MAX Graphics, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 300% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon HD 6990M and Iris Xe MAX Graphics.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.