UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs vs Radeon HD 7950

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 7950 with UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs, including specs and performance data.

HD 7950
2012
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
11.90
+171%

HD 7950 outperforms UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs by a whopping 171% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking410662
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.39no data
Power efficiency4.2711.25
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameTahitiTiger Lake Xe
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date31 January 2012 (13 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores179248
Compute units28no data
Core clock speedno data350 MHz
Boost clock speed1250 MHz1450 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate89.60no data
Floating-point processing power2.867 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs112no data

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0 x16no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount3 GBno data
Memory bus width384 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1250 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth240 GB/sno data
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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortno data
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
PowerTune+-
ZeroCore+-
Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXDirectX® 1112_1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data

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.

HD 7950 11.90
+171%
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 4.39

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 7950 7500
+223%
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 2321

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 HD45−50
+165%
17
−165%

Cost per frame, $

1080p9.98no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+0%
11
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21
+0%
21
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 17
+0%
17
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 15
+0%
15
+0%
Far Cry 5 22
+0%
22
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 17
+0%
17
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 10
+0%
10
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 12
+0%
12
+0%
World of Tanks 25
+0%
25
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 24
+0%
24
+0%
Far Cry 5 14
+0%
14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16
+0%
16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
World of Tanks 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Valorant 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how HD 7950 and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs compete in popular games:

  • HD 7950 is 165% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.90 4.39
Recency 31 January 2012 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 28 Watt

HD 7950 has a 171.1% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 614.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 7950 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 7950 is a desktop card while UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is a notebook one.

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.


AMD Radeon HD 7950
Radeon HD 7950
Intel UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs

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.


4 424 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 501 vote

Rate UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 7950 or UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.