GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB vs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs with GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB, including specs and performance data.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
2020
28 Watt
9.24

GTX 1050 3 GB outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by a considerable 43% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking477387
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency22.7712.17
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeGP107
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date15 August 2020 (4 years ago)21 May 2018 (6 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 cores96768
Core clock speed400 MHz1392 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHz1518 MHz
Number of transistorsno data3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data72.86
Floating-point processing powerno data2.332 TFLOPS
ROPsno data24
TMUsno data48

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 3.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Widthno data2-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 dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data3 GB
Memory bus widthno data96 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1752 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data84.1 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 DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
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 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
CUDA-6.1

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 HD27
−29.6%
35−40
+29.6%
1440p16
−31.3%
21−24
+31.3%
4K11
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 15
−40%
21−24
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 20
−35%
27−30
+35%
Elden Ring 21
−42.9%
30−33
+42.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 13
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Forza Horizon 4 38
−31.6%
50−55
+31.6%
Metro Exodus 29
−37.9%
40−45
+37.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 17
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%
Valorant 26
−34.6%
35−40
+34.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 12
−33.3%
16−18
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Dota 2 28
−42.9%
40−45
+42.9%
Elden Ring 22
−36.4%
30−33
+36.4%
Far Cry 5 31
−29%
40−45
+29%
Fortnite 50−55
−38.9%
75−80
+38.9%
Forza Horizon 4 30
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 17
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%
Metro Exodus 19
−42.1%
27−30
+42.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
−38.9%
100−105
+38.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8
−25%
10−11
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−42.9%
40−45
+42.9%
Valorant 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%
World of Tanks 96
−35.4%
130−140
+35.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
−40%
14−16
+40%
Dota 2 47
−38.3%
65−70
+38.3%
Far Cry 5 34
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%
Forza Horizon 4 24
−25%
30−33
+25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
−38.9%
100−105
+38.9%
Valorant 23
−30.4%
30−33
+30.4%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 7
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Elden Ring 15
−40%
21−24
+40%
Grand Theft Auto V 7
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−36.4%
60−65
+36.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
World of Tanks 65−70
−36.4%
90−95
+36.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 20−22
−35%
27−30
+35%
Forza Horizon 4 19
−42.1%
27−30
+42.1%
Metro Exodus 16−18
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Valorant 21−24
−30.4%
30−33
+30.4%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Dota 2 8
−25%
10−11
+25%
Elden Ring 7
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 8
−25%
10−11
+25%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−29.6%
35−40
+29.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
−25%
10−11
+25%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 20
−35%
27−30
+35%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Fortnite 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 11
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Valorant 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%

This is how Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs and GTX 1050 3 GB compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1050 3 GB is 30% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1050 3 GB is 31% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1050 3 GB is 27% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.24 13.23
Recency 15 August 2020 21 May 2018
Chip lithography 10 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 75 Watt

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs has an age advantage of 2 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 167.9% lower power consumption.

GTX 1050 3 GB, on the other hand, has a 43.2% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB is a desktop 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 96EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB
GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB

Other comparisons

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.


3.6 998 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 349 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB 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.