Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs Radeon R9 M275

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M275 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 M275
2014
2 GB GDDR5
2.49

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs outperforms R9 M275 by a whopping 163% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking805546
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.16no data
Power efficiencyno data18.53
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameVenusTiger Lake Xe
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date28 January 2014 (11 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores64080
Core clock speed900 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHz1350 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data28 Watt
Texture fill rate37.00no data
Floating-point processing power1.184 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs40no 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 x16no 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 speed1000 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth64 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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12_1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

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.

R9 M275 2.49
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 6.54
+163%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

R9 M275 3261
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 5332
+63.5%

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 M275 1885
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 4010
+113%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

R9 M275 11459
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 21931
+91.4%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

R9 M275 145646
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 166479
+14.3%

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 HD24
+26.3%
19
−26.3%
1440p3−4
−200%
9
+200%
4K5−6
−180%
14
+180%

Cost per frame, $

1080p33.33no data
1440p266.66no data
4K160.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
−229%
23
+229%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−343%
31
+343%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−133%
14
+133%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
−129%
16
+129%
Battlefield 5 9−10
−189%
26
+189%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−243%
24
+243%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−100%
12
+100%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−300%
20
+300%
Fortnite 14−16
−207%
40−45
+207%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−146%
30−35
+146%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
−320%
21
+320%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−100%
24−27
+100%
Valorant 45−50
−68.9%
75−80
+68.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
−71.4%
12
+71.4%
Battlefield 5 9−10
−156%
23
+156%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−71.4%
12
+71.4%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
−124%
110−120
+124%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−66.7%
10
+66.7%
Dota 2 27−30
−44.4%
39
+44.4%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−280%
19
+280%
Fortnite 14−16
−207%
40−45
+207%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−146%
30−35
+146%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
−300%
20
+300%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
−100%
14
+100%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−140%
12
+140%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−100%
24−27
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−175%
22
+175%
Valorant 45−50
−68.9%
75−80
+68.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
−156%
23
+156%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−50%
9
+50%
Dota 2 27−30
−33.3%
36
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−260%
18
+260%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−146%
30−35
+146%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−100%
24−27
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−37.5%
11
+37.5%
Valorant 45−50
−68.9%
75−80
+68.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
−207%
40−45
+207%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 20−22
−170%
50−55
+170%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
−500%
6
+500%
Metro Exodus 0−1 7−8
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
−62.5%
35−40
+62.5%
Valorant 24−27
−220%
80−85
+220%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−200%
6
+200%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−200%
12
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−183%
16−18
+183%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−150%
10
+150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Valorant 14−16
−157%
35−40
+157%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Dota 2 7−8
−129%
16
+129%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−450%
10−12
+450%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High Preset

Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how R9 M275 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:

  • R9 M275 is 26% faster in 1080p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 200% faster in 1440p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 180% faster in 4K

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

  • in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is ahead in 56 tests (93%)
  • there's a draw in 4 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.49 6.54
Recency 28 January 2014 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs has a 162.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M275 in performance tests.

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 M275
Radeon R9 M275
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs

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.


3.5 4 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M275 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 964 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 M275 or Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.