Iris Xe MAX Graphics vs Radeon R9 270

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
HD 8860 OEM R7 265X OEM R9 255 OEM R9 260 OEM R9 270 R9 270 1024SP R9 270X R9 280 R9 280X R9 280X2 R9 285 R9 290 R9 290X R9 290X2 R9 295X2
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Xe Graphics G4 Xe Graphics G4 48EU Mobile Xe Graphics G7 80EU Xe Graphics G7 96EU Xe MAX Graphics UHD Graphics 16EU Mobile UHD Graphics 32EU

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 270 with Iris Xe MAX Graphics, including specs and performance data.

R9 270
2013, $179
2 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
10.38
+132%

R9 270 outperforms MAX Graphics by a whopping 132% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
R9 270 R9 270
Iris Xe MAX Graphics Iris Xe MAX Graphics

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking491716
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.52no data
Power efficiency5.3413.80
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameCuracaoDG1
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 November 2013 (12 years ago)31 October 2020 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$179 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1280768
Core clock speedno data300 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHz1650 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate74.0079.20
Floating-point processing power2.368 TFLOPS2.534 TFLOPS
ROPs3224
TMUs8048
L1 Cache320 KBno data
L2 Cache512 KB1024 KB
L3 Cacheno data4 MB

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x4
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 typeGDDR5LPDDR4X
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2133 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s68.26 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
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

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.2

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R9 270 10.38
+132%
Iris Xe MAX Graphics 4.47

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.

R9 270 4314
+132%
Samples: 12
Iris Xe MAX Graphics 1858
Samples: 8

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
Iris Xe MAX Graphics 6333
+6.8%

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 HD60−65
+122%
27
−122%
1440p45−50
+125%
20
−125%
4K35−40
+119%
16
−119%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.98no data
1440p3.98no data
4K5.11no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Fortnite 34
+0%
34
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 40
+0%
40
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 25
+0%
25
+0%
Fortnite 31
+0%
31
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20
+0%
20
+0%
Metro Exodus 18
+0%
18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 34
+0%
34
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 38
+0%
38
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 24
+0%
24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18
+0%
18
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 22
+0%
22
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+0%
11
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 20
+0%
20
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how R9 270 and Iris Xe MAX Graphics compete in popular games:

  • R9 270 is 122% faster in 1080p
  • R9 270 is 125% faster in 1440p
  • R9 270 is 119% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 10.38 4.47
Recency 13 November 2013 31 October 2020
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 25 Watt

R9 270 has a 132% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe MAX Graphics, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 500% lower power consumption.

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

Be aware that Radeon R9 270 is a desktop graphics card while Iris Xe MAX Graphics is a notebook one.

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 MAX Graphics Iris Xe MAX Graphics
vs
GeForce MX230 GeForce MX230
R9 270 Radeon R9 270
vs
HD 7870 XT Radeon HD 7870 XT
R7 265 AMD R7 265
vs
Quadro 4000 4000
R5 230 OEM AMD R5 230 OEM
vs
Vega 7 7
R7 260 AMD R7 260
vs
RX 6500 6500
R9 270 AMD R9 270
vs
ATI HD 5670 5670
R9 270 AMD R9 270
vs
GTX 750 Ti OEM 750 Ti OEM
R9 290 AMD R9 290
vs
RX 6650 XT 6650 XT
R5 240 OEM AMD R5 240 OEM
vs
GT 430 OEM 430 OEM
R7 240 AMD R7 240
vs
R5 M255 M255
R7 240 AMD R7 240
vs
RTX 2080 2080
HD 7730 AMD HD 7730
vs
Quadro T1000 T1000

Community ratings

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

3.9 684 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 292 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 270 or Iris Xe MAX Graphics, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.