Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs GeForce GTX 960M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 960M and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 960M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
8.76
+15.6%

GTX 960M outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking492528
Place by popularitynot in top-10065
Power efficiency8.0118.56
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGM107Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date13 March 2015 (9 years ago)15 August 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 cores64080
Core clock speed1096 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1176 MHz1350 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate47.04no data
Floating-point processing power1.505 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs40no 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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)no 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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed2500 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth80 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data
VGA аnalog display support+no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+no data
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
BatteryBoost+-
Quick Syncno data+
Ansel+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12_1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.1.126-
CUDA+-

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.

GTX 960M 8.76
+15.6%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 7.58

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 960M 5278
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 5332
+1%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 960M 4318
+7.7%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 4010

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 960M 30086
+37.2%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 21931

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 960M 226308
+35.9%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 166479

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

GTX 960M 1148
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 1180
+2.8%

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

GTX 960M 56
+28.2%
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 44

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:

900p95
+18.8%
80−85
−18.8%
Full HD34
+78.9%
19
−78.9%
1440p15
+50%
10
−50%
4K14
−21.4%
17
+21.4%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 25
+31.6%
18−20
−31.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−46.2%
19
+46.2%
Battlefield 5 30
+36.4%
21−24
−36.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+7.7%
13
−7.7%
Far Cry 5 28
+64.7%
16−18
−64.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 31
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Forza Horizon 4 84
+71.4%
45−50
−71.4%
Hitman 3 16−18
+6.3%
16
−6.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+16.3%
40−45
−16.3%
Metro Exodus 31
−22.6%
38
+22.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+20%
20−22
−20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 48
+92%
24−27
−92%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
−5.1%
62
+5.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 31
+63.2%
18−20
−63.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−23.1%
16
+23.1%
Battlefield 5 23
+4.5%
21−24
−4.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+40%
10
−40%
Far Cry 5 24
+41.2%
16−18
−41.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 23
+9.5%
21−24
−9.5%
Forza Horizon 4 71
+44.9%
45−50
−44.9%
Hitman 3 16−18
+13.3%
15
−13.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+16.3%
40−45
−16.3%
Metro Exodus 26
−3.8%
27
+3.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+20%
20−22
−20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+20.8%
24
−20.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 73
+232%
21−24
−232%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+20.4%
49
−20.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 11
−72.7%
18−20
+72.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+75%
8
−75%
Far Cry 5 18
+5.9%
16−18
−5.9%
Forza Horizon 4 25
−96%
45−50
+96%
Hitman 3 16−18
+41.7%
12
−41.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+213%
16
−213%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+45%
20
−45%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+27.3%
11
−27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+7.3%
55−60
−7.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+20%
20−22
−20%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 15
+36.4%
10−12
−36.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 10
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 45
+66.7%
27−30
−66.7%
Hitman 3 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Metro Exodus 15
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−60%
16
+60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−25%
10
+25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+19.1%
45−50
−19.1%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+15.4%
12−14
−15.4%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 7
+40%
5−6
−40%
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%
Metro Exodus 8
+60%
5−6
−60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+150%
4−5
−150%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 4
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%

This is how GTX 960M and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:

  • GTX 960M is 19% faster in 900p
  • GTX 960M is 79% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 960M is 50% faster in 1440p
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 21% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 960M is 232% faster.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 96% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 960M is ahead in 58 tests (81%)
  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is ahead in 9 tests (13%)
  • there's a draw in 5 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.76 7.58
Recency 13 March 2015 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 28 Watt

GTX 960M has a 15.6% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 167.9% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 960M is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs in performance tests.


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 960M
GeForce GTX 960M
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.7 1059 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 960M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 921 vote

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.