RTX A1000 vs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs with RTX A1000, including specs and performance data.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
2020
28 Watt
9.24

RTX A1000 outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by a whopping 205% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking478202
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency22.7238.80
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeGA107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date15 August 2020 (4 years ago)16 April 2024 (less than a year 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 cores962304
Core clock speed400 MHz727 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHz1462 MHz
Number of transistorsno data8,700 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data105.3
Floating-point processing powerno data6.737 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data72
Tensor Coresno data72
Ray Tracing Coresno data18

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 x8
Lengthno data163 mm
Widthno data1-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 data8 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data192.0 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 data4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

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 data6.7
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-8.6

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
−196%
80−85
+196%
1440p16
−181%
45−50
+181%
4K11
−173%
30−35
+173%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 15
−200%
45−50
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 20
−200%
60−65
+200%
Elden Ring 21
−186%
60−65
+186%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
−200%
90−95
+200%
Counter-Strike 2 13
−169%
35−40
+169%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
−186%
40−45
+186%
Forza Horizon 4 38
−189%
110−120
+189%
Metro Exodus 29
−193%
85−90
+193%
Red Dead Redemption 2 17
−194%
50−55
+194%
Valorant 26
−188%
75−80
+188%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
−200%
90−95
+200%
Counter-Strike 2 12
−192%
35−40
+192%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
−173%
30−33
+173%
Dota 2 28
−204%
85−90
+204%
Elden Ring 22
−195%
65−70
+195%
Far Cry 5 31
−190%
90−95
+190%
Fortnite 50−55
−196%
160−170
+196%
Forza Horizon 4 30
−200%
90−95
+200%
Grand Theft Auto V 17
−194%
50−55
+194%
Metro Exodus 19
−189%
55−60
+189%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
−192%
210−220
+192%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8
−200%
24−27
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−204%
85−90
+204%
Valorant 30−35
−194%
100−105
+194%
World of Tanks 96
−202%
290−300
+202%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
−200%
90−95
+200%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
−178%
50−55
+178%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
−200%
30−33
+200%
Dota 2 47
−198%
140−150
+198%
Far Cry 5 34
−194%
100−105
+194%
Forza Horizon 4 24
−192%
70−75
+192%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
−192%
210−220
+192%
Valorant 23
−204%
70−75
+204%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 7
−200%
21−24
+200%
Elden Ring 15
−200%
45−50
+200%
Grand Theft Auto V 7
−200%
21−24
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
−189%
130−140
+189%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
World of Tanks 65−70
−199%
200−210
+199%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−194%
50−55
+194%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
−200%
9−10
+200%
Far Cry 5 20−22
−200%
60−65
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 19
−189%
55−60
+189%
Metro Exodus 16−18
−194%
50−55
+194%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−173%
30−33
+173%
Valorant 21−24
−204%
70−75
+204%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Dota 2 8
−200%
24−27
+200%
Elden Ring 7
−200%
21−24
+200%
Grand Theft Auto V 8
−200%
24−27
+200%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−196%
80−85
+196%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−200%
18−20
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
−200%
24−27
+200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Dota 2 20
−200%
60−65
+200%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−173%
30−33
+173%
Fortnite 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 11
−173%
30−33
+173%
Valorant 9−10
−200%
27−30
+200%

This is how Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs and RTX A1000 compete in popular games:

  • RTX A1000 is 196% faster in 1080p
  • RTX A1000 is 181% faster in 1440p
  • RTX A1000 is 173% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.24 28.18
Recency 15 August 2020 16 April 2024
Chip lithography 10 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 50 Watt

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs has 78.6% lower power consumption.

RTX A1000, on the other hand, has a 205% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A1000 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 RTX A1000 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 96EUs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
NVIDIA RTX A1000
RTX A1000

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.


3.6 999 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 22 votes

Rate RTX A1000 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.