GeForce 910M vs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 and GeForce 910M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 outperforms 910M by a whopping 543% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 498 | 1017 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 3.28 |
| Architecture | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) | Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015) |
| GPU code name | Tiger Lake Xe | GK208B |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 August 2020 (5 years ago) | 13 March 2015 (10 years ago) |
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 | 96 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 641 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 915 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 10 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 33 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 20.51 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.4923 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 32 |
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 support | no data | PCI Express 3.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | DDR4 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | DDR3 MB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 1001 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 16.02 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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| GPU Boost | no data | 2.0 |
| Optimus | - | + |
| GameWorks | - | + |
| Quick Sync | + | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX 12_1 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | - | + |
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.
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.
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 | 55−60
+511%
| 9
−511%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+1950%
|
2−3
−1950%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1020%
|
5−6
−1020%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+400%
|
8−9
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+230%
|
10−11
−230%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+165%
|
30−35
−165%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+1950%
|
2−3
−1950%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 140−150
+373%
|
30
−373%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+278%
|
18−20
−278%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1020%
|
5−6
−1020%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+400%
|
8−9
−400%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+3300%
|
1−2
−3300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+800%
|
2−3
−800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+230%
|
10−11
−230%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+243%
|
7−8
−243%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+165%
|
30−35
−165%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+1950%
|
2−3
−1950%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+278%
|
18−20
−278%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+400%
|
8−9
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+230%
|
10−11
−230%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+243%
|
7−8
−243%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1020%
|
5−6
−1020%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 70−75
+689%
|
9−10
−689%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+550%
|
2−3
−550%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+1371%
|
7−8
−1371%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+633%
|
3−4
−633%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+1800%
|
1−2
−1800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+450%
|
4−5
−450%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 18−20
+850%
|
2−3
−850%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+33.3%
|
14−16
−33.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+586%
|
7−8
−586%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+1600%
|
2−3
−1600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+650%
|
2−3
−650%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| God of War | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| God of War | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| God of War | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| God of War | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| God of War | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
This is how Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 and GeForce 910M compete in popular games:
- Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is 511% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is 3300% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 performs better in 34 tests (69%)
- there's a draw in 15 tests (31%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.13 | 1.42 |
| Recency | 15 August 2020 | 13 March 2015 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 28 nm |
Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 has a 543% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.
The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 910M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
