Iris Xe MAX Graphics vs Radeon PRO W7600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon PRO W7600 with Iris Xe MAX Graphics, including specs and performance data.

PRO W7600
2023
8 GB GDDR6, 130 Watt
37.04
+622%

PRO W7600 outperforms Iris Xe MAX Graphics by a whopping 622% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking130626
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation74.03no data
Power efficiency19.6614.16
ArchitectureRDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameNavi 33DG1
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date3 August 2023 (1 year ago)31 October 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores2048768
Core clock speedno data300 MHz
Boost clock speed2440 MHz1650 MHz
Number of transistors13,300 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology6 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate312.379.20
Floating-point processing powerno data2.534 TFLOPS
ROPs6424
TMUs12848

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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x4
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR6LPDDR4X
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed18 GB/s2133 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.0 GB/s68.26 GB/s
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 Connectors4x DisplayPort 2.1No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.76.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.23.0
Vulkan1.31.2

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. 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.

PRO W7600 37.04
+622%
Iris Xe MAX Graphics 5.13

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

PRO W7600 14240
+622%
Iris Xe MAX Graphics 1971

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 HD190−200
+604%
27
−604%
1440p140−150
+600%
20
−600%
4K110−120
+588%
16
−588%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.15no data
1440p4.28no data
4K5.45no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Elden Ring 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
+0%
7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 39
+0%
39
+0%
Metro Exodus 23
+0%
23
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 33
+0%
33
+0%
Valorant 29
+0%
29
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6
+0%
Dota 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Elden Ring 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 29
+0%
29
+0%
Fortnite 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 33
+0%
33
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20
+0%
20
+0%
Metro Exodus 18
+0%
18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9
+0%
9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 15
+0%
15
+0%
World of Tanks 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 38
+0%
38
+0%
Far Cry 5 42
+0%
42
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 29
+0%
29
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Elden Ring 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
World of Tanks 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20
+0%
20
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+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%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 20
+0%
20
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 11
+0%
11
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how PRO W7600 and Iris Xe MAX Graphics compete in popular games:

  • PRO W7600 is 604% faster in 1080p
  • PRO W7600 is 600% faster in 1440p
  • PRO W7600 is 588% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 37.04 5.13
Recency 3 August 2023 31 October 2020
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 6 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 25 Watt

PRO W7600 has a 622% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 66.7% more advanced lithography process.

Iris Xe MAX Graphics, on the other hand, has 420% lower power consumption.

The Radeon PRO W7600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe MAX Graphics in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon PRO W7600 is a workstation card while Iris Xe MAX Graphics 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.


AMD Radeon PRO W7600
Radeon PRO W7600
Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics
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.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


5 3 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 272 votes

Rate Iris Xe MAX Graphics 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.