Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs vs Radeon R9 270

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Radeon R9 255 OEM Radeon R9 260 OEM Radeon R9 270 Radeon R9 270 1024SP Radeon R9 270X Radeon R9 280 Radeon R9 280X Radeon R9 280X2 Radeon R9 285 Radeon R9 285X Radeon R9 290 Radeon R9 290X Radeon R9 290X2 Radeon R9 295X2
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 R9 270 with Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs, including specs and performance data.

R9 270
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
11.20
+21.2%

R9 270 outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by a significant 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

R9 270 R9 270
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking422477
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.01no data
Power efficiency5.1422.72
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameCuracaoTiger Lake Xe
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 November 2013 (11 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$179 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 cores128096
Core clock speedno data400 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHz1350 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate74.00no data
Floating-point processing power2.368 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs80no 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 x16no data
Length210 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory bandwidth179.2 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortno data
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
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
Vulkan+-

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.

R9 270 11.20
+21.2%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 9.24

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.

R9 270 5930
+15.4%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 5139

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 HD30−35
+11.1%
27
−11.1%
1440p18−20
+12.5%
16
−12.5%
4K12−14
+9.1%
11
−9.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p5.97no data
1440p9.94no data
4K14.92no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 15
+0%
15
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20
+0%
20
+0%
Elden Ring 21
+0%
21
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 13
+0%
13
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+0%
14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 38
+0%
38
+0%
Metro Exodus 29
+0%
29
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 17
+0%
17
+0%
Valorant 26
+0%
26
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12
+0%
12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+0%
11
+0%
Dota 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Elden Ring 22
+0%
22
+0%
Far Cry 5 31
+0%
31
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 17
+0%
17
+0%
Metro Exodus 19
+0%
19
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8
+0%
8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
World of Tanks 96
+0%
96
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Dota 2 47
+0%
47
+0%
Far Cry 5 34
+0%
34
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24
+0%
24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Valorant 23
+0%
23
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 7
+0%
7
+0%
Elden Ring 15
+0%
15
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 7
+0%
7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
World of Tanks 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
+0%
3
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 19
+0%
19
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 8
+0%
8
+0%
Elden Ring 7
+0%
7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 8
+0%
8
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
+0%
8
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 20
+0%
20
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 11
+0%
11
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

This is how R9 270 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs compete in popular games:

  • R9 270 is 11% faster in 1080p
  • R9 270 is 13% faster in 1440p
  • R9 270 is 9% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 11.20 9.24
Recency 13 November 2013 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 28 Watt

R9 270 has a 21.2% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 435.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 270 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 270 is a desktop 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 R9 270
Radeon R9 270
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

R9 270 Radeon R9 270
vs
GTX 660 Ti GeForce GTX 660 Ti
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
vs
HD 7970M Radeon HD 7970M
R9 270 Radeon R9 270
vs
HD 7870 XT Radeon HD 7870 XT
R9 270 Radeon R9 270
vs
Graphics Radeon Graphics
R9 270 Radeon R9 270
vs
GeForce MX450 GeForce MX450
R9 270 Radeon R9 270
vs
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
R9 270 Radeon R9 270
vs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7
R9 270 Radeon R9 270
vs
RTX 3070 GeForce RTX 3070
R9 270 Radeon R9 270
vs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
R9 270 Radeon R9 270
vs
RTX 3060 GeForce RTX 3060
R9 270 Radeon R9 270
vs
RTX 3060 Ti GeForce RTX 3060 Ti
R9 270 Radeon R9 270
vs
RX 6700 XT Radeon RX 6700 XT
R9 270 Radeon R9 270
vs
RX 6500 XT Radeon RX 6500 XT

Community ratings

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

3.9 613 votes

Rate Radeon R9 270 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 999 votes

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.