Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) vs Radeon RX Vega M GL
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX Vega M GL and Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RX Vega M GL outperforms Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) by an impressive 86% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 457 | 629 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 10.67 | 14.90 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 22 | Ice Lake G7 Gen. 11 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 February 2018 (7 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 | 1280 | 64 |
| Core clock speed | 931 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1011 MHz | 1100 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5,000 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 12-25 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 80.88 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.588 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 32 | no data |
| TMUs | 80 | 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).
| Interface | IGP | 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 | HBM2 | DDR4 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 1024 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 700 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 179.2 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 |
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_0) | 12_1 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | no data |
| 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.
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 | 30−35
+66.7%
| 18
−66.7%
|
FPS performance in popular games
- Full HD
Medium Preset - Full HD
High Preset - Full HD
Ultra Preset - Full HD
Epic Preset - 4K
High Preset - 4K
Ultra Preset - 4K
Epic Preset - Full HD
Low Preset - Full HD
Medium Preset - Full HD
High Preset - Full HD
Ultra Preset - 1440p
High Preset - 1440p
Ultra Preset - 1440p
Epic Preset - 4K
High Preset - 4K
Ultra Preset
| Fortnite | 55−60
+78.1%
|
32
−78.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+70%
|
20−22
−70%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 140−150
+269%
|
39
−269%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+127%
|
30
−127%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+128%
|
25
−128%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35−40
+300%
|
9
−300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+70%
|
20−22
−70%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+38.9%
|
18
−38.9%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+143%
|
28
−143%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+70%
|
20−22
−70%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+178%
|
9
−178%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+280%
|
15
−280%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+17.6%
|
16−18
−17.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+106%
|
16−18
−106%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
| Fortnite | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
| Atomic Heart | 15
+0%
|
15
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 32
+0%
|
32
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Atomic Heart | 12
+0%
|
12
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 18
+0%
|
18
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 28
+0%
|
28
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12
+0%
|
12
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 13
+0%
|
13
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 15
+0%
|
15
+0%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Atomic Heart | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 16
+0%
|
16
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6
+0%
|
6
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10
+0%
|
10
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5
+0%
|
5
+0%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 11
+0%
|
11
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Atomic Heart | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
This is how RX Vega M GL and Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) compete in popular games:
- RX Vega M GL is 67% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega M GL is 900% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RX Vega M GL is ahead in 17 tests (28%)
- there's a draw in 43 tests (72%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 8.73 | 4.69 |
| Recency | 1 February 2018 | 28 May 2019 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 12 Watt |
RX Vega M GL has a 86.1% higher aggregate performance score.
Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 441.7% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX Vega M GL is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) 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.
