Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs Radeon RX 560 Mobile

Place in the ranking	419	528
Place by popularity	not in top-100	65
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	5.67	no data
Power efficiency	13.98	18.54
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code name	Baffin	Tiger Lake Xe
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	5 January 2017 (7 years ago)	15 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$99.99	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 cores	896	80
Core clock speed	1175 MHz	400 MHz
Boost clock speed	1275 MHz	1350 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	28 Watt
Texture fill rate	58.97	no data
Floating-point processing power	1.887 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	no data
TMUs	56	no 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 size	large	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	no 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 type	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	96 GB/s	no 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 Connectors

No outputs

no data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync	+	-
Quick Sync	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12_1
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	2.0	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	-

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. 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.

RX 560 Mobile 11.20
+48.1%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 7.56

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.

RX 560 Mobile 8329
+56.2%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 5332

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.

RX 560 Mobile 5738
+43.1%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 4010

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.

RX 560 Mobile 36528
+66.6%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 21931

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 HD	43 +126%	19 −126%
1440p	14−16 +40%	10 −40%
4K	36 +112%	17 −112%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.33	no data
1440p	7.14	no data
4K	2.78	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

16−18
+21.4%

−21.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	27−30 +42.1%	18−20 −42.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 −11.8%	19 +11.8%
Battlefield 5	35−40 +63.6%	21−24 −63.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +53.3%	14−16 −53.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +30.8%	13 −30.8%
Far Cry 5	33 +94.1%	16−18 −94.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−35 +47.6%	21−24 −47.6%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80 +53.1%	45−50 −53.1%
Hitman 3	21−24 +31.3%	16 −31.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60−65 +39.5%	40−45 −39.5%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −2.7%	38 +2.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 +55%	20−22 −55%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +48%	24−27 −48%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 +8.1%	62 −8.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	27−30 +42.1%	18−20 −42.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 +6.3%	16 −6.3%
Battlefield 5	35−40 +63.6%	21−24 −63.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +53.3%	14−16 −53.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +70%	10 −70%
Far Cry 5	28 +64.7%	16−18 −64.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−35 +47.6%	21−24 −47.6%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80 +53.1%	45−50 −53.1%
Hitman 3	21−24 +40%	15 −40%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60−65 +39.5%	40−45 −39.5%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +37%	27 −37%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 +55%	20−22 −55%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +54.2%	24 −54.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +31.8%	21−24 −31.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 +36.7%	49 −36.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	27−30 +42.1%	18−20 −42.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 +70%	10−11 −70%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +53.3%	14−16 −53.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +113%	8 −113%
Far Cry 5	21 +23.5%	16−18 −23.5%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80 +53.1%	45−50 −53.1%
Hitman 3	21−24 +75%	12 −75%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60−65 +275%	16 −275%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +85%	20 −85%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20 +81.8%	11 −81.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 +21.8%	55−60 −21.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30−35
+55%

20−22

−55%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +57.1%	14−16 −57.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 +54.5%	10−12 −54.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +44.4%	9−10 −44.4%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +96.3%	27−30 −96.3%
Hitman 3	14−16 +27.3%	10−12 −27.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +43.8%	16−18 −43.8%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +125%	8−9 −125%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +6.3%	16 −6.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +10%	10 −10%
Watch Dogs: Legion	70−75 +51.1%	45−50 −51.1%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20
+46.2%

12−14

−46.2%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Hitman 3	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +104%	24−27 −104%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +350%	2−3 −350%
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11
+42.9%

7−8

−42.9%

This is how RX 560 Mobile and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:

RX 560 Mobile is 126% faster in 1080p
RX 560 Mobile is 40% faster in 1440p
RX 560 Mobile is 112% faster in 4K

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

in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 560 Mobile is 350% faster.
in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 12% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 560 Mobile is ahead in 69 tests (96%)
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	11.20	7.56
Recency	5 January 2017	15 August 2020
Chip lithography	14 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	28 Watt

RX 560 Mobile has a 48.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 96.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 560 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.