RTX A2000 vs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 with RTX A2000, including specs and performance data.

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
2020
9.95

RTX A2000 outperforms Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 by a whopping 255% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking461147
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data93.82
Power efficiencyno data34.62
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeGA106
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date15 August 2020 (4 years ago)10 August 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$449

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 cores963328
Core clock speedno data562 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1200 MHz
Number of transistorsno data12,000 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data70 Watt
Texture fill rateno data124.8
Floating-point processing powerno data7.987 TFLOPS
ROPsno data48
TMUsno data104
Tensor Coresno data104
Ray Tracing Coresno data26

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data167 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR4GDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data6 GB
Memory bus widthno data192 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data288.0 GB/s
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 Connectorsno data4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

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.

DirectXDirectX 12_112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-8.6
DLSS-+

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.

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 9.95
RTX A2000 35.35
+255%

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.

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 5000
RTX A2000 14934
+199%

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 HD27−30
−256%
96
+256%
1440p12−14
−258%
43
+258%
4K7−8
−286%
27
+286%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.68
1440pno data10.44
4Kno data16.63

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
−190%
110−120
+190%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−248%
108
+248%
Fortnite 55−60
−164%
140−150
+164%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−212%
120−130
+212%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−297%
130−140
+297%
Valorant 90−95
−124%
200−210
+124%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
−190%
110−120
+190%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
−95.1%
270−280
+95.1%
Dota 2 65−70
−253%
240−250
+253%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−216%
98
+216%
Fortnite 55−60
−164%
140−150
+164%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−212%
120−130
+212%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
−269%
129
+269%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−233%
60
+233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−297%
130−140
+297%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−388%
117
+388%
Valorant 90−95
−124%
200−210
+124%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
−190%
110−120
+190%
Dota 2 65−70
−253%
240−250
+253%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−194%
91
+194%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−212%
120−130
+212%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−297%
130−140
+297%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−167%
64
+167%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
−164%
140−150
+164%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
−218%
220−230
+218%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
−346%
58
+346%
Metro Exodus 10−11
−240%
34
+240%
Valorant 100−110
−128%
230−240
+128%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
−278%
85−90
+278%
Far Cry 5 20−22
−205%
61
+205%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−309%
90−95
+309%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
−342%
80−85
+342%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
−180%
56
+180%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−300%
20
+300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−300%
40
+300%
Valorant 45−50
−306%
190−200
+306%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
−364%
50−55
+364%
Dota 2 30−35
−253%
120−130
+253%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−233%
30
+233%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−275%
60−65
+275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 84
+0%
84
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 62
+0%
62
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 52
+0%
52
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45
+0%
45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 47
+0%
47
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6
+0%
6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

This is how Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 and RTX A2000 compete in popular games:

  • RTX A2000 is 256% faster in 1080p
  • RTX A2000 is 258% faster in 1440p
  • RTX A2000 is 286% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX A2000 is 388% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX A2000 is ahead in 39 tests (61%)
  • there's a draw in 25 tests (39%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.95 35.35
Recency 15 August 2020 10 August 2021
Chip lithography 10 nm 8 nm

RTX A2000 has a 255.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 months, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 in performance tests.

Be aware that Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is a notebook card while RTX A2000 is a workstation 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.


Intel Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
NVIDIA RTX A2000
RTX A2000

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.


3.9 16 votes

Rate Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 598 votes

Rate RTX A2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 or RTX A2000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.