Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs vs Radeon R9 M390X

Place in the ranking	474	478
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	8.59	22.72
Architecture	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code name	Amethyst	Tiger Lake Xe
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	5 May 2015 (9 years ago)	15 August 2020 (4 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	2048	96
Core clock speed	723 MHz	400 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1350 MHz
Number of transistors	5,000 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	28 Watt
Texture fill rate	92.54	no data
Floating-point processing power	2.961 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	32	no data
TMUs	128	no 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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	no 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 type	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	no data
Memory bus width	256 Bit	no data
Memory bandwidth	160.0 GB/s	no 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 Connectors	No outputs	no data
Eyefinity	+	-

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync	+	-
HD3D	+	-
PowerTune	+	-
DualGraphics	+	-
ZeroCore	+	-
Switchable graphics	+	-
Quick Sync	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12_1
Shader Model	6.3	no data
OpenGL	4.4	no data
OpenCL	Not Listed	no data
Vulkan	+	-
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 M390X 9.36
+1.3%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 9.24

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.

R9 M390X 9448
+45.3%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs 6504

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	27−30 +0%	27 +0%
1440p	16−18 +0%	16 +0%
4K	10−12 −10%	11 +10%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +20%	15 −20%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −11.1%	20 +11.1%
Elden Ring	27−30 +28.6%	21 −28.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +38.5%	13 −38.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +28.6%	14 −28.6%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −2.7%	38 +2.7%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −16%	29 +16%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +47.1%	17 −47.1%
Valorant	30−35 +30.8%	26 −30.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +50%	12 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +63.6%	11 −63.6%
Dota 2	30−35 +17.9%	28 −17.9%
Elden Ring	27−30 +22.7%	22 −22.7%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +25.8%	31 −25.8%
Fortnite	55−60 +1.9%	50−55 −1.9%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +23.3%	30 −23.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 +94.1%	17 −94.1%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +31.6%	19 −31.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 +1.4%	70−75 −1.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +213%	8 −213%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
World of Tanks	130−140 +42.7%	96 −42.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +80%	10 −80%
Dota 2	30−35 −42.4%	47 +42.4%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +14.7%	34 −14.7%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +54.2%	24 −54.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 +1.4%	70−75 −1.4%
Valorant	30−35 +47.8%	23 −47.8%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	10−12 +57.1%	7 −57.1%
Elden Ring	12−14 −15.4%	15 +15.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	12−14 +71.4%	7 −71.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
World of Tanks	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +5.9%	16−18 −5.9%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +133%	3 −133%
Far Cry 5	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 +5.3%	19 −5.3%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Valorant	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Dota 2	20−22 +150%	8 −150%
Elden Ring	6−7 −16.7%	7 +16.7%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +138%	8 −138%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +138%	8 −138%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	20−22 +0%	20 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Fortnite	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	11 +0%
Valorant	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

This is how R9 M390X and Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs compete in popular games:

A tie in 1080p
A tie in 1440p
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 10% faster in 4K

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

in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 M390X is 213% faster.
in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is 42% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

R9 M390X is ahead in 33 tests (52%)
Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs is ahead in 6 tests (10%)
there's a draw in 24 tests (38%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.36	9.24
Recency	5 May 2015	15 August 2020
Chip lithography	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	28 Watt

R9 M390X has a 1.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 257.1% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R9 M390X and Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.