Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) vs UHD Graphics P630
Aggregate performance score
We've compared UHD Graphics P630 and Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Graphics P630 outperforms Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) by a moderate 18% 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 | 639 | 671 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 30.16 | 15.39 |
| Architecture | Generation 9.5 (2016−2020) | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) |
| GPU code name | Coffee Lake GT2 | Ice Lake G7 Gen. 11 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 24 May 2018 (7 years ago) | 28 May 2019 (6 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 | 192 | 64 |
| Core clock speed | 350 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1200 MHz | 1100 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm+++ | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 12-25 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 28.80 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.4608 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 3 | no data |
| TMUs | 24 | 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).
| Interface | Ring Bus | 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 | System Shared | DDR4 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | no data |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | no data |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | no data |
| 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 | Portable Device Dependent | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | + | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12_1 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | no data |
| 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.
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 | 21−24
+16.7%
| 18
−16.7%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 27−30
−10.3%
|
32
+10.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+20%
|
10−11
−20%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+38.9%
|
18
−38.9%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 27−30
+3.6%
|
28
−3.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+20%
|
10−11
−20%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 24−27
+26.3%
|
19
−26.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+58.3%
|
12
−58.3%
|
| Fortnite | 35−40
+12.5%
|
32
−12.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+108%
|
13
−108%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 16−18
+13.3%
|
15
−13.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+10%
|
20−22
−10%
|
| Valorant | 65−70
+9.7%
|
60−65
−9.7%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+56.3%
|
16
−56.3%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 27−30
+383%
|
6
−383%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 95−100
+154%
|
39
−154%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+20%
|
10−11
−20%
|
| Dota 2 | 45−50
+63.3%
|
30
−63.3%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 24−27
+33.3%
|
18
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+90%
|
10
−90%
|
| Fortnite | 35−40
+44%
|
25
−44%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 16−18
+21.4%
|
14−16
−21.4%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
+133%
|
9
−133%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−12
+120%
|
5
−120%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+10%
|
20−22
−10%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
−12.5%
|
18
+12.5%
|
| Valorant | 65−70
+9.7%
|
60−65
−9.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+19%
|
21−24
−19%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+20%
|
10−11
−20%
|
| Dota 2 | 45−50
+75%
|
28
−75%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 24−27
+20%
|
20−22
−20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+72.7%
|
11
−72.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+10%
|
20−22
−10%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+77.8%
|
9
−77.8%
|
| Valorant | 65−70
+9.7%
|
60−65
−9.7%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 35−40
+140%
|
15
−140%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 45−50
+17.9%
|
35−40
−17.9%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+5.6%
|
35−40
−5.6%
|
| Valorant | 65−70
+19.6%
|
55−60
−19.6%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 10−12
+22.2%
|
9−10
−22.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14
+20%
|
10−11
−20%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 12−14
+20%
|
10−11
−20%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
+20%
|
24−27
−20%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
+16.7%
|
18−20
−16.7%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
This is how UHD Graphics P630 and Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) compete in popular games:
- UHD Graphics P630 is 17% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics P630 is 383% faster.
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) is 13% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- UHD Graphics P630 performs better in 57 tests (93%)
- Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) performs better in 2 tests (3%)
- there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 5.89 | 5.01 |
| Recency | 24 May 2018 | 28 May 2019 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 12 Watt |
UHD Graphics P630 has a 17.6% higher aggregate performance score.
Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.
The UHD Graphics P630 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) 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.
