Iris Xe MAX Graphics vs Radeon R9 FURY X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 FURY X with Iris Xe MAX Graphics, including specs and performance data.

R9 FURY X
2015
4 GB High Bandwidth Memory (HBM), 275 Watt
24.88
+387%

R9 FURY X outperforms Iris Xe MAX Graphics by a whopping 387% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking213621
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.87no data
Power efficiency6.6415.00
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameFijiDG1
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date24 June 2015 (9 years ago)31 October 2020 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores4096768
Compute units64no data
Core clock speedno data300 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz1650 MHz
Number of transistors8,900 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate268.879.20
Floating-point processing power8.602 TFLOPS2.534 TFLOPS
ROPs6424
TMUs25648

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 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x4
Length191 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinno data
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

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 typeHigh Bandwidth Memory (HBM)LPDDR4X
High bandwidth memory (HBM)+no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width4096 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1050 MHz2133 MHz
Memory bandwidth512 GB/s68.26 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 HDMI, 3x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
PowerTune+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan+1.2
Mantle+-

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R9 FURY X 24.88
+387%
Iris Xe MAX Graphics 5.11

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R9 FURY X 9594
+387%
Iris Xe MAX Graphics 1971

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.

R9 FURY X 16710
+164%
Iris Xe MAX Graphics 6333

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 HD130−140
+381%
27
−381%
1440p95−100
+375%
20
−375%
4K75−80
+369%
16
−369%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 19
+0%
19
+0%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Hitman 3 24
+0%
24
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 57
+0%
57
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 33
+0%
33
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6
+0%
6
+0%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Hitman 3 23
+0%
23
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 43
+0%
43
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 33
+0%
33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Hitman 3 21
+0%
21
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 26
+0%
26
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 29
+0%
29
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18
+0%
18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 25
+0%
25
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20
+0%
20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+0%
11
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 11
+0%
11
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

This is how R9 FURY X and Iris Xe MAX Graphics compete in popular games:

  • R9 FURY X is 381% faster in 1080p
  • R9 FURY X is 375% faster in 1440p
  • R9 FURY X is 369% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.88 5.11
Recency 24 June 2015 31 October 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 25 Watt

R9 FURY X has a 386.9% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe MAX Graphics, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 1000% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 FURY X is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe MAX Graphics in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 FURY X is a desktop card while Iris Xe MAX Graphics is a notebook 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.


AMD Radeon R9 FURY X
Radeon R9 FURY X
Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics
Iris Xe MAX Graphics

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.3 81 vote

Rate Radeon R9 FURY X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 248 votes

Rate Iris Xe MAX Graphics 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.