Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs GeForce GTX 295

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GTX 260 OEM GTX 275 GTX 285 GTX 295
VS
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 295 with Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, including specs and performance data.

GTX 295
2009
1792 MB GDDR3, 289 Watt
3.14

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs outperforms GTX 295 by a whopping 141% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

GTX 295 GTX 295
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking757530
Place by popularitynot in top-10073
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.14no data
Power efficiency0.7518.61
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGT200BTiger Lake Xe
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date8 January 2009 (16 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$500 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores48080
CUDA cores per GPU240no data
Core clock speed576 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1350 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology55 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)289 Watt28 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate46.08no data
Floating-point processing power0.5962 TFLOPSno data
ROPs28no data
TMUs80no 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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount1792 MBno data
Standard memory config per GPU896 MBno data
Memory bus width896 Bitno data
Memory clock speed999 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth223.8 GB/sno data
Memory interface width per GPU448 Bitno data
Shared memory-+

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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVIHDMIno data
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

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

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)128bitno data
Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12_1
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL2.1no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA+-

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 HD7−8
−171%
19
+171%
1440p4−5
−150%
10
+150%
4K6−7
−150%
15
+150%

Cost per frame, $

1080p71.43no data
1440p125.00no data
4K83.33no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 11
+0%
11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+0%
14
+0%
Elden Ring 18
+0%
18
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9
+0%
9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Metro Exodus 27
+0%
27
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 18
+0%
18
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10
+0%
10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
+0%
5
+0%
Dota 2 22
+0%
22
+0%
Elden Ring 17
+0%
17
+0%
Far Cry 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24
+0%
24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 13
+0%
13
+0%
Metro Exodus 17
+0%
17
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6
+0%
6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 14
+0%
14
+0%
World of Tanks 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 5
+0%
5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
+0%
4
+0%
Dota 2 36
+0%
36
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20
+0%
20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 6
+0%
6
+0%
Elden Ring 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6
+0%
6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
World of Tanks 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16
+0%
16
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+0%
10
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Elden Ring 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16
+0%
16
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how GTX 295 and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 171% faster in 1080p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 150% faster in 1440p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 150% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 3.14 7.57
Recency 8 January 2009 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 55 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 289 Watt 28 Watt

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs has a 141.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 450% more advanced lithography process, and 932.1% lower power consumption.

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 295 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 295 is a desktop card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is a notebook one.

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

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.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
GeForce GTX 295
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

GTX 295 GeForce GTX 295
vs
HD 7730 Radeon HD 7730
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
vs
Vega 7 Radeon Vega 7
GTX 295 GeForce GTX 295
vs
GTX 260 GeForce GTX 260
9800 GTX+ GeForce 9800 GTX+
vs
GT 440 GeForce GT 440
GTX 275 GeForce GTX 275
vs
ATI X700 AGP Radeon X700 AGP
GTX 295 GeForce GTX 295
vs
GT 745A GeForce GT 745A
GTX 295 GeForce GTX 295
vs
FX 4000 SDI Quadro FX 4000 SDI
GTX 295 GeForce GTX 295
vs
RX 580 2048SP Radeon RX 580 2048SP
GTX 285 GeForce GTX 285
vs
ATI Mobility HD 5650 Mobility Radeon HD 5650
GTX 260 216 NVIDIA 260 Core 216
vs
RTX 5090 D 5090 D
9400 GT Rev. 2 GeForce 9400 GT Rev. 2
vs
RTX 6000 Quadro RTX 6000
9400 GT GeForce 9400 GT
vs
Go 7900 GS GeForce Go 7900 GS
9400 GT GeForce 9400 GT
vs
ATI X1900 GT Radeon X1900 GT

Community ratings

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

4 86 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 295 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 933 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.