Radeon 630 vs Iris Xe Graphics G7

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Xe Graphics G7 and Radeon 630, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Iris Xe Graphics G7
2020
10.60
+170%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 outperforms 630 by a whopping 170% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking436703
Place by popularity18not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data5.41
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XePolaris 23
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 August 2020 (4 years ago)13 May 2019 (5 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 cores96512
Core clock speedno data1082 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1218 MHz
Number of transistorsno data2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data38.98
Floating-point processing powerno data1.247 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32

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 x8
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 typeDDR4GDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data112.0 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 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.

DirectXDirectX 12_112 (12_0)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.0
Vulkan-1.2.131

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+218%
10−12
−218%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+207%
14−16
−207%
Fortnite 60−65
+195%
21−24
−195%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+147%
16−18
−147%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+170%
30−33
−170%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+115%
12−14
−115%
Valorant 40−45
+567%
6−7
−567%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+218%
10−12
−218%
Dota 2 35−40
+217%
12−14
−217%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+115%
20−22
−115%
Fortnite 60−65
+170%
21−24
−170%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+147%
16−18
−147%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+217%
12−14
−217%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+138%
30−35
−138%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+115%
12−14
−115%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+146%
12−14
−146%
Valorant 40−45
+567%
6−7
−567%
World of Tanks 150−160
+125%
65−70
−125%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+218%
10−12
−218%
Dota 2 35−40
+217%
12−14
−217%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+115%
20−22
−115%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+147%
16−18
−147%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+138%
30−35
−138%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+220%
10−11
−220%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 60−65
+195%
21−24
−195%

1440p
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+200%
7−8
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Valorant 24−27
+189%
9−10
−189%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+156%
9−10
−156%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+500%
4−5
−500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 27−30
+170%
10−11
−170%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Valorant 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Dota 2 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+210%
10−11
−210%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Elden Ring 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Elden Ring 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Elden Ring 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
World of Tanks 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Valorant, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 is 567% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics G7 is ahead in 33 tests (56%)
  • there's a draw in 26 tests (44%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.60 3.93
Recency 15 August 2020 13 May 2019
Chip lithography 10 nm 14 nm

Iris Xe Graphics G7 has a 169.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 630 in performance tests.


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
Iris Xe Graphics G7
AMD Radeon 630
Radeon 630

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.


3.5 2625 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 32 votes

Rate Radeon 630 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.