Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs Radeon R7 240

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Radeon HD 8570 OEM Radeon HD 8670 OEM Radeon R5 240 OEM Radeon R5 340 OEM Radeon R5 340X OEM Radeon R5 430 OEM Radeon R7 240 Radeon R7 240 OEM Radeon R7 250 Radeon R7 340 OEM Radeon R7 350X OEM Radeon R7 430 OEM
VS
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 240 with Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, including specs and performance data.

R7 240
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
2.33

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs outperforms R7 240 by a whopping 225% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

R7 240 R7 240
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking852530
Place by popularitynot in top-10073
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.16no data
Power efficiency5.3618.65
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameOlandTiger Lake Xe
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (11 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$69 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 cores32080
Core clock speedno data400 MHz
Boost clock speed780 MHz1350 MHz
Number of transistors950 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate14.00no data
Floating-point processing power0.448 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs20no 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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8no data
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsN/Ano 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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1150 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth72 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGAno data
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data
Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212_1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data

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.

R7 240 2.33
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 7.57
+225%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R7 240 1220
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 4010
+229%

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 HD5−6
−280%
19
+280%
1440p3−4
−233%
10
+233%
4K4−5
−275%
15
+275%

Cost per frame, $

1080p13.80no data
1440p23.00no data
4K17.25no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 11
+0%
11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+0%
14
+0%
Elden Ring 18
+0%
18
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9
+0%
9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Metro Exodus 27
+0%
27
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 18
+0%
18
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10
+0%
10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
+0%
5
+0%
Dota 2 22
+0%
22
+0%
Elden Ring 17
+0%
17
+0%
Far Cry 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24
+0%
24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 13
+0%
13
+0%
Metro Exodus 17
+0%
17
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6
+0%
6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 14
+0%
14
+0%
World of Tanks 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 5
+0%
5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
+0%
4
+0%
Dota 2 36
+0%
36
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20
+0%
20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 6
+0%
6
+0%
Elden Ring 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6
+0%
6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
World of Tanks 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16
+0%
16
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+0%
10
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Elden Ring 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16
+0%
16
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how R7 240 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 280% faster in 1080p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 233% faster in 1440p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 275% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 2.33 7.57
Recency 8 October 2013 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 28 Watt

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs has a 224.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 78.6% lower power consumption.

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 240 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 240 is a desktop card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 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 R7 240
Radeon R7 240
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

R7 240 Radeon R7 240
vs
ATI HD 4770 Radeon HD 4770
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
vs
Vega 7 Radeon Vega 7
R7 240 Radeon R7 240
vs
ATI HD 4830 Radeon HD 4830
GT 755M GeForce GT 755M
vs
Radeon 780M Radeon 780M
GTX 1050 Ti GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
vs
9600 GSO GeForce 9600 GSO
ATI Xpress 1100 Radeon Xpress 1100
vs
RX 6950 XT Radeon RX 6950 XT
GTX 1050 Ti GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
vs
RTX 4050 Max-Q GeForce RTX 4050 Max-Q
GTX 1080 Ti GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
vs
P102-101 P102 101
GT 240 GeForce GT 240
vs
Quadro K420 Quadro K420
RTX 4090 Max-Q GeForce RTX 4090 Max-Q
vs
Apple M3 Max 40-Core GPU M3 Max 40-Core GPU
RX 570 Mobile Radeon RX 570 Mobile
vs
GTX 1050 Mobile GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile
GT 540M GeForce GT 540M
vs
Go 7300 GeForce Go 7300
K1100M Quadro K1100M
vs
R7 M270 Radeon R7 M270

Community ratings

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

3.3 1215 votes

Rate Radeon R7 240 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 932 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 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.