Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) vs Qualcomm Adreno 680
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Qualcomm Adreno 680 and Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 680 by a whopping 144% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 869 | 624 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 21.84 | 14.95 |
| Architecture | no data | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) |
| GPU code name | no data | Ice Lake G7 Gen. 11 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 6 December 2018 (6 years ago) | 28 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 cores | no data | 64 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1100 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7 Watt | 12-25 Watt |
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 | DDR4 |
| Shared memory | + | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | no data | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 | 12_1 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
3DMark 11 Performance GPU
3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.
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 | 7−8
−157%
| 18
+157%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 5−6
−200%
|
15
+200%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−100%
|
10−11
+100%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 5−6
−140%
|
12
+140%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
−200%
|
18
+200%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−100%
|
10−11
+100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−300%
|
12
+300%
|
| Fortnite | 9−10
−256%
|
32
+256%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
−18.2%
|
13
+18.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−450%
|
10−12
+450%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−72.7%
|
18−20
+72.7%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−55%
|
60−65
+55%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 5−6
−140%
|
12−14
+140%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
−167%
|
16
+167%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 40−45
+7.7%
|
39
−7.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−100%
|
10−11
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−30.4%
|
30
+30.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−233%
|
10
+233%
|
| Fortnite | 9−10
−178%
|
25
+178%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
−109%
|
21−24
+109%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−450%
|
10−12
+450%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5
−125%
|
9
+125%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5
+66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−72.7%
|
18−20
+72.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−157%
|
18
+157%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−55%
|
60−65
+55%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
−250%
|
21−24
+250%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−100%
|
10−11
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−21.7%
|
28
+21.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−267%
|
11
+267%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
−109%
|
21−24
+109%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−450%
|
10−12
+450%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−72.7%
|
18−20
+72.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9
+28.6%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−55%
|
60−65
+55%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 9−10
−66.7%
|
15
+66.7%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−160%
|
35−40
+160%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2
−500%
|
6−7
+500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
−127%
|
30−35
+127%
|
| Valorant | 16−18
−235%
|
55−60
+235%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−233%
|
10−11
+233%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−140%
|
12−14
+140%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−700%
|
8−9
+700%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−167%
|
8−9
+167%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 4−5
−150%
|
10−11
+150%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−13.3%
|
16−18
+13.3%
|
| Valorant | 10−12
−136%
|
24−27
+136%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Dota 2 | 5−6
−260%
|
18−20
+260%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 7−8 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
This is how Qualcomm Adreno 680 and Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) compete in popular games:
- Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) is 157% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 680 is 8% faster.
- in Forza Horizon 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) is 700% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Qualcomm Adreno 680 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
- Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) is ahead in 56 tests (90%)
- there's a draw in 5 tests (8%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.23 | 5.45 |
| Recency | 6 December 2018 | 28 May 2019 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7 Watt | 12 Watt |
Qualcomm Adreno 680 has a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 71.4% lower power consumption.
Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), on the other hand, has a 144.4% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 5 months.
The Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 680 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
