Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition vs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 and Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
2020
9.26

R9 M295X Mac Edition outperforms Tiger Lake-U Graphics G7 by a substantial 33% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking516441
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data3.80
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeAmethyst
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 August 2020 (5 years ago)23 November 2014 (11 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 cores962048
Core clock speedno data850 MHz
Number of transistorsno data5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data250 Watt
Texture fill rateno data108.8
Floating-point processing powerno data3.482 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data128
L1 Cacheno data512 KB
L2 Cacheno data512 KB

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 dataMXM-B (3.0)

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 typeDDR4GDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1362 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data174.3 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

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 (12_0)
Shader Modelno data6.3
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.0
Vulkan-1.2.131

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
−22%
50−55
+22%
Far Cry 5 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Fortnite 55−60
−25%
70−75
+25%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%
Valorant 90−95
−31.9%
120−130
+31.9%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
−32.9%
190−200
+32.9%
Dota 2 65−70
−32.4%
90−95
+32.4%
Far Cry 5 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Fortnite 55−60
−25%
70−75
+25%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
−28.6%
45−50
+28.6%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−25%
30−33
+25%
Valorant 90−95
−31.9%
120−130
+31.9%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%
Dota 2 65−70
−32.4%
90−95
+32.4%
Far Cry 5 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−25%
30−33
+25%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
−25%
70−75
+25%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
−26.8%
90−95
+26.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
−33.3%
16−18
+33.3%
Metro Exodus 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Valorant 100−110
−25%
130−140
+25%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
−30.4%
30−33
+30.4%
Far Cry 5 20−22
−20%
24−27
+20%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−22.7%
27−30
+22.7%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 20−22
−20%
24−27
+20%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
−20%
24−27
+20%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Valorant 45−50
−32.7%
65−70
+32.7%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Dota 2 35−40
−28.6%
45−50
+28.6%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−31.3%
21−24
+31.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.26 12.35
Recency 15 August 2020 23 November 2014
Chip lithography 10 nm 28 nm

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

R9 M295X Mac Edition, on the other hand, has a 33% higher aggregate performance score.

The Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition is our recommended choice as it beats the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 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.

Community ratings

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


3.9 18 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 6 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition 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 R9 M295X Mac Edition, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.