Radeon RX 7600 XT vs Iris Plus Graphics 645

Place in the ranking	666	80
Place by popularity	not in top-100	83
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	76.87
Power efficiency	20.47	16.19
Architecture	Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	Coffee Lake GT3e	Navi 33
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	7 October 2019 (5 years ago)	8 January 2024 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$329

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 cores	384	2048
Core clock speed	300 MHz	1980 MHz
Boost clock speed	1050 MHz	2755 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	13,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm+++	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	190 Watt
Texture fill rate	50.40	352.6
Floating-point processing power	0.8064 TFLOPS	22.57 TFLOPS
ROPs	6	64
TMUs	48	128
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	32

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	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	no data	204 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 8-pin

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	16 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	288.0 GB/s
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 Connectors	Portable Device Dependent	1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI	-	+

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	2.2
Vulkan	1.3	1.3

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.

Iris Plus Graphics 645 4.46

RX 7600 XT 44.68
+902%

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.

Iris Plus Graphics 645 1716

RX 7600 XT 17177
+901%

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

−900%

250−260
+900%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

1.32

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −900%	120−130 +900%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −900%	90−95 +900%
Elden Ring	10−11 −900%	100−105 +900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −900%	130−140 +900%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −900%	120−130 +900%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −900%	90−95 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −900%	190−200 +900%
Metro Exodus	10−11 −900%	100−105 +900%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −900%	140−150 +900%
Valorant	9−10 −900%	90−95 +900%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −900%	130−140 +900%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −900%	120−130 +900%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −900%	90−95 +900%
Dota 2	10 −900%	100−105 +900%
Elden Ring	10−11 −900%	100−105 +900%
Far Cry 5	23 −900%	230−240 +900%
Fortnite	24−27 −900%	260−270 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −900%	190−200 +900%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −900%	140−150 +900%
Metro Exodus	10−11 −900%	100−105 +900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −821%	350−400 +821%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −900%	140−150 +900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −900%	150−160 +900%
Valorant	9−10 −900%	90−95 +900%
World of Tanks	70−75 −846%	700−750 +846%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −900%	130−140 +900%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −900%	120−130 +900%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −900%	90−95 +900%
Dota 2	27 −900%	270−280 +900%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −900%	220−230 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −900%	190−200 +900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −821%	350−400 +821%
Valorant	9−10 −900%	90−95 +900%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%
Elden Ring	5−6 −900%	50−55 +900%
Grand Theft Auto V	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−33 −900%	300−310 +900%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%
World of Tanks	30−35 −838%	300−310 +838%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −900%	60−65 +900%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −900%	90−95 +900%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −900%	100−105 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −900%	50−55 +900%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −900%	60−65 +900%
Valorant	12−14 −900%	130−140 +900%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −900%	160−170 +900%
Elden Ring	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −900%	160−170 +900%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 −900%	130−140 +900%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −900%	160−170 +900%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Dota 2	16−18 −900%	160−170 +900%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −900%	50−55 +900%
Fortnite	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%
Valorant	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%

This is how Iris Plus Graphics 645 and RX 7600 XT compete in popular games:

RX 7600 XT is 900% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.46	44.68
Recency	7 October 2019	8 January 2024
Chip lithography	14 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	190 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics 645 has 1166.7% lower power consumption.

RX 7600 XT, on the other hand, has a 901.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7600 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Plus Graphics 645 in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Plus Graphics 645 is a notebook card while Radeon RX 7600 XT is a desktop one.

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