Radeon Pro W6900X vs Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking525not rated
Place by popularity56not in top-100
Power efficiency19.70no data
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeNavi 21
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date15 August 2020 (4 years ago)3 August 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$4,999

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 cores805120
Core clock speed400 MHz1825 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHz2150 MHz
Number of transistorsno data26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rateno data688.0
Floating-point processing powerno data22.02 TFLOPS
ROPsno data128
TMUsno data320
Ray Tracing Coresno data80

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno dataQuad-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data32 GB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data512.0 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 Connectorsno data1x HDMI, 4x Thunderbolt
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.

DirectX12_112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.1
Vulkan-1.2

Pros & cons summary


Recency 15 August 2020 3 August 2021
Chip lithography 10 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 300 Watt

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs has 971.4% lower power consumption.

Pro W6900X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 months, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs and Radeon Pro W6900X. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is a notebook card while Radeon Pro W6900X is a workstation 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.


Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
AMD Radeon Pro W6900X
Radeon Pro W6900X

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.


3.8 875 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 67 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W6900X 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.