Iris Xe Graphics MAX vs GeForce 8200

Place in the ranking	1254	623
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	0.69	14.04
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code name	C78	DG1
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	17 April 2007 (17 years ago)	31 October 2020 (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 cores	16	768
Core clock speed	500 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	no data	1650 MHz
Number of transistors	210 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	80 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	25 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.000	79.20
Floating-point processing power	0.0384 TFLOPS	2.534 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	24
TMUs	8	48

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	PCI	PCIe 4.0 x4
Width	IGP	IGP

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	LPDDR4X
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	4 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	4.3 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	no data	68.26 GB/s

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

1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	4.0	6.4
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	N/A	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2

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.

GeForce 8200 0.40

Iris Xe Graphics MAX 5.12
+1180%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GeForce 8200 155

Iris Xe Graphics MAX 1971
+1172%

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.40	5.12
Recency	17 April 2007	31 October 2020
Chip lithography	80 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	25 Watt

Iris Xe Graphics MAX has a 1180% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 700% more advanced lithography process, and 60% lower power consumption.

The Iris Xe Graphics MAX is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8200 in performance tests.

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