Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs vs Radeon Pro Vega 64

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro Vega 64 with Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs, including specs and performance data.

Pro Vega 64
2017
16 GB HBM2, 250 Watt
33.52
+254%

Pro Vega 64 outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by a whopping 254% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking158468
Place by popularitynot in top-10087
Power efficiency9.2323.29
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameVega 10Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date27 June 2017 (7 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 cores409696
Core clock speed1250 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHz1350 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate345.6no data
Floating-point processing power11.06 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs256no 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
WidthIGPno 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 typeHBM2no data
Maximum RAM amount16 GBno data
Memory bus width2048 Bitno data
Memory clock speed786 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth402.4 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.

Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12_1
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.1.125-

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 HD90−95
+246%
26
−246%
1440p50−55
+233%
15
−233%
4K35−40
+250%
10
−250%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 20
+0%
20
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 22
+0%
22
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21
+0%
21
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 36
+0%
36
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
+0%
16
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Hitman 3 24
+0%
24
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 124
+0%
124
+0%
Metro Exodus 35
+0%
35
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 17
+0%
17
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90
+0%
90
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18
+0%
18
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 32
+0%
32
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 13
+0%
13
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Hitman 3 23
+0%
23
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 112
+0%
112
+0%
Metro Exodus 28
+0%
28
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 26
+0%
26
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30
+0%
30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 84
+0%
84
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14
+0%
14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 23
+0%
23
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+0%
11
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Hitman 3 20
+0%
20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 23
+0%
23
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24
+0%
24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+0%
14
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14
+0%
14
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
+0%
7
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 19
+0%
19
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+0%
12
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 11
+0%
11
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

This is how Pro Vega 64 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs compete in popular games:

  • Pro Vega 64 is 246% faster in 1080p
  • Pro Vega 64 is 233% faster in 1440p
  • Pro Vega 64 is 250% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.52 9.47
Recency 27 June 2017 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 28 Watt

Pro Vega 64 has a 254% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 792.9% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro Vega 64 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega 64 is a workstation card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 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 Vega 64
Radeon Pro Vega 64
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.3 19 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 981 vote

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 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.