Iris Xe Graphics G7 vs Radeon Pro 555X

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro 555X with Iris Xe Graphics G7, including specs and performance data.

Pro 555X
2018
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
8.42

Iris Xe Graphics G7 outperforms Pro 555X by a significant 22% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking513449
Place by popularitynot in top-10017
Power efficiency7.70no data
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code namePolaris 21Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date16 July 2018 (6 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 cores76896
Core clock speed907 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,000 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Wattno data
Texture fill rate43.54no data
Floating-point processing power1.393 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs48no 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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5DDR4
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1275 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth81.6 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)DirectX 12_1
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
Battlefield 5 30−35
−23.5%
40−45
+23.5%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−28%
30−35
+28%
Fortnite 45−50
−20.8%
55−60
+20.8%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−20%
40−45
+20%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−21.4%
30−35
+21.4%
Valorant 80−85
−13.6%
90−95
+13.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
Battlefield 5 30−35
−23.5%
40−45
+23.5%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
−16.9%
140−150
+16.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Dota 2 60−65
−15%
65−70
+15%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−28%
30−35
+28%
Fortnite 45−50
−20.8%
55−60
+20.8%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−20%
40−45
+20%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
−24.1%
35−40
+24.1%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−26.7%
18−20
+26.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−21.4%
30−35
+21.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−19%
24−27
+19%
Valorant 80−85
−13.6%
90−95
+13.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
−23.5%
40−45
+23.5%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Dota 2 60−65
−15%
65−70
+15%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−28%
30−35
+28%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−20%
40−45
+20%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−21.4%
30−35
+21.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−19%
24−27
+19%
Valorant 80−85
−17.3%
95−100
+17.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 45−50
−20.8%
55−60
+20.8%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 60−65
−19.7%
70−75
+19.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Metro Exodus 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%
Valorant 85−90
−20.2%
100−110
+20.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−25%
20−22
+25%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−21.1%
21−24
+21.1%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
−25%
20−22
+25%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
−5.3%
20−22
+5.3%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
Valorant 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
−20.7%
35−40
+20.7%
Far Cry 5 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 is 67% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Iris Xe Graphics G7 surpassed Pro 555X in all 42 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.42 10.27
Recency 16 July 2018 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm

Iris Xe Graphics G7 has a 22% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 555X in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 555X is a mobile workstation card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 is a mobile workstation 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.


AMD Radeon Pro 555X
Radeon Pro 555X
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7
Iris Xe Graphics G7

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.


3.8 172 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 555X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 2683 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro 555X or Iris Xe Graphics G7, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.