Radeon RX 6600S vs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs and Radeon RX 6600S, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RX 6600S outperforms Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs by a whopping 250% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 477 | 173 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 22.72 | 27.85 |
| Architecture | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024) |
| GPU code name | Tiger Lake Xe | Navi 23 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 August 2020 (4 years ago) | 4 January 2022 (3 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 cores | 96 | 1792 |
| Core clock speed | 400 MHz | 1700 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1350 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 11,060 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 10 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 80 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 224.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 7.168 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 64 |
| TMUs | no data | 112 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 28 |
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 size | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | no data | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 224.0 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 | no data | No outputs |
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_1 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.3 |
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 | 27
−233%
| 90−95
+233%
|
| 1440p | 16
−244%
| 55−60
+244%
|
| 4K | 11
−218%
| 35−40
+218%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 15
−327%
|
60−65
+327%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20
−240%
|
65−70
+240%
|
| Elden Ring | 21
−424%
|
110−120
+424%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−33
−210%
|
90−95
+210%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 13
−392%
|
60−65
+392%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14
−386%
|
65−70
+386%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 38
−295%
|
150−160
+295%
|
| Metro Exodus | 29
−179%
|
80−85
+179%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 17
−288%
|
65−70
+288%
|
| Valorant | 26
−396%
|
120−130
+396%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−33
−210%
|
90−95
+210%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12
−433%
|
60−65
+433%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 11
−518%
|
65−70
+518%
|
| Dota 2 | 28
−279%
|
100−110
+279%
|
| Elden Ring | 22
−400%
|
110−120
+400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 31
−184%
|
85−90
+184%
|
| Fortnite | 50−55
−178%
|
150−160
+178%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30
−400%
|
150−160
+400%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 17
−524%
|
100−110
+524%
|
| Metro Exodus | 19
−326%
|
80−85
+326%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 70−75
−154%
|
180−190
+154%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 8
−725%
|
65−70
+725%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
−293%
|
110−120
+293%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−279%
|
120−130
+279%
|
| World of Tanks | 96
−189%
|
270−280
+189%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−33
−210%
|
90−95
+210%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
−256%
|
60−65
+256%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10
−580%
|
65−70
+580%
|
| Dota 2 | 47
−126%
|
100−110
+126%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 34
−159%
|
85−90
+159%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24
−525%
|
150−160
+525%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 70−75
−154%
|
180−190
+154%
|
| Valorant | 23
−461%
|
120−130
+461%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 7
−729%
|
55−60
+729%
|
| Elden Ring | 15
−313%
|
60−65
+313%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 7
−729%
|
55−60
+729%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
−289%
|
170−180
+289%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 8−9
−288%
|
30−35
+288%
|
| World of Tanks | 65−70
−215%
|
200−210
+215%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 16−18
−271%
|
60−65
+271%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
−200%
|
30−33
+200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 20−22
−410%
|
100−110
+410%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 19
−374%
|
90−95
+374%
|
| Metro Exodus | 16−18
−324%
|
70−75
+324%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12
−373%
|
50−55
+373%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
−309%
|
90−95
+309%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−967%
|
30−35
+967%
|
| Dota 2 | 8
−650%
|
60−65
+650%
|
| Elden Ring | 7
−314%
|
27−30
+314%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 8
−650%
|
60−65
+650%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
−420%
|
24−27
+420%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
−278%
|
100−110
+278%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
−250%
|
21−24
+250%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8
−650%
|
60−65
+650%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−350%
|
35−40
+350%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−967%
|
30−35
+967%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−550%
|
12−14
+550%
|
| Dota 2 | 20
−200%
|
60−65
+200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−309%
|
45−50
+309%
|
| Fortnite | 10−11
−330%
|
40−45
+330%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 11
−373%
|
50−55
+373%
|
| Valorant | 9−10
−433%
|
45−50
+433%
|
This is how Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs and RX 6600S compete in popular games:
- RX 6600S is 233% faster in 1080p
- RX 6600S is 244% faster in 1440p
- RX 6600S is 218% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 6600S is 967% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, RX 6600S surpassed Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs in all 63 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.24 | 32.37 |
| Recency | 15 August 2020 | 4 January 2022 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 80 Watt |
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs has 185.7% lower power consumption.
RX 6600S, on the other hand, has a 250.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 6600S is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
