Radeon Pro W6600M vs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 with Radeon Pro W6600M, including specs and performance data.

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
2020
9.18

Pro W6600M outperforms Tiger Lake-U Graphics G7 by a whopping 194% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking508240
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data23.28
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeNavi 23
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date15 August 2020 (5 years ago)8 June 2021 (4 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 cores961792
Core clock speedno data1224 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2034 MHz
Number of transistorsno data11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data90 Watt
Texture fill rateno data227.8
Floating-point processing powerno data7.29 TFLOPS
ROPsno data64
TMUsno data112
Ray Tracing Coresno data28
L0 Cacheno data448 KB
L1 Cacheno data512 KB
L2 Cacheno data2 MB
L3 Cacheno data32 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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR4GDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data8 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data224.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectorsno dataPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX 12_112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.1
Vulkan-1.3

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 40−45
−159%
100−110
+159%
Escape from Tarkov 35−40
−171%
100−110
+171%
Far Cry 5 30−33
−200%
90−95
+200%
Fortnite 55−60
−130%
130−140
+130%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−166%
100−110
+166%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−224%
110−120
+224%
Valorant 90−95
−100%
180−190
+100%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 40−45
−159%
100−110
+159%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
−88.8%
270−280
+88.8%
Dota 2 65−70
−91.2%
130−140
+91.2%
Escape from Tarkov 35−40
−171%
100−110
+171%
Far Cry 5 30−33
−200%
90−95
+200%
Fortnite 55−60
−130%
130−140
+130%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−166%
100−110
+166%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
−183%
95−100
+183%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−232%
60−65
+232%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−224%
110−120
+224%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−258%
85−90
+258%
Valorant 90−95
−100%
180−190
+100%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
−159%
100−110
+159%
Dota 2 65−70
−91.2%
130−140
+91.2%
Escape from Tarkov 35−40
−171%
100−110
+171%
Far Cry 5 30−33
−200%
90−95
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−166%
100−110
+166%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−224%
110−120
+224%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−258%
85−90
+258%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
−130%
130−140
+130%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
−171%
190−200
+171%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
−308%
50−55
+308%
Metro Exodus 10−11
−280%
35−40
+280%
Valorant 100−110
−111%
210−220
+111%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
−230%
75−80
+230%
Escape from Tarkov 18−20
−256%
60−65
+256%
Far Cry 5 20−22
−220%
60−65
+220%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−232%
70−75
+232%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 20−22
−240%
65−70
+240%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
−170%
50−55
+170%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−320%
40−45
+320%
Valorant 45−50
−239%
160−170
+239%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−12
−291%
40−45
+291%
Dota 2 35−40
−151%
85−90
+151%
Escape from Tarkov 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−267%
30−35
+267%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−206%
45−50
+206%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−244%
30−35
+244%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
−256%
30−35
+256%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Counter-Strike 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Pro W6600M is 380% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro W6600M performs better in 47 tests (73%)
  • there's a draw in 17 tests (27%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.18 27.03
Recency 15 August 2020 8 June 2021
Chip lithography 10 nm 7 nm

Pro W6600M has a 194.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 months, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W6600M is our recommended choice as it beats the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 in performance tests.

Be aware that Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro W6600M is a mobile workstation one.

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.


Intel Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
AMD Radeon Pro W6600M
Radeon Pro W6600M

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.


3.9 16 votes

Rate Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Radeon Pro W6600M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 or Radeon Pro W6600M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.