Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile vs UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) with RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU)
2019
12 Watt
3.14
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile
2024
4 GB GDDR6, 35 Watt
27.35
+771%

Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) by a whopping 771% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking753203
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency8.6954.04
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameIce Lake G1 Gen. 11AD107
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date28 May 2019 (5 years ago)26 February 2024 (less than a year 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 cores322048
Core clock speed300 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz2025 MHz
Number of transistorsno data18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12-25 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rateno data129.6
Floating-point processing powerno data8.294 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data64
Tensor Coresno data64
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8

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 data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data128.0 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 dataPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-8.9

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.

UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) 3.14
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 27.35
+771%

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.

UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) 2127
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 20239
+852%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) 8750
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 66297
+658%

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.

UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) 1521
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 14136
+829%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) 425
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 5278
+1143%

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 HD13
−746%
110−120
+746%
4K9
−733%
75−80
+733%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8
−713%
65−70
+713%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Battlefield 5 5−6
−700%
40−45
+700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10
−750%
85−90
+750%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−713%
65−70
+713%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−713%
130−140
+713%
Hitman 3 6
−733%
50−55
+733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−770%
200−210
+770%
Metro Exodus 12
−733%
100−105
+733%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6
−733%
50−55
+733%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−746%
110−120
+746%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−669%
300−310
+669%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−733%
75−80
+733%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Battlefield 5 5−6
−700%
40−45
+700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−713%
65−70
+713%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−713%
130−140
+713%
Hitman 3 8−9
−713%
65−70
+713%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−770%
200−210
+770%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−650%
30−33
+650%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 11
−764%
95−100
+764%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−757%
120−130
+757%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−669%
300−310
+669%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−733%
75−80
+733%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−713%
130−140
+713%
Hitman 3 8−9
−713%
65−70
+713%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−770%
200−210
+770%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 13
−746%
110−120
+746%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
−700%
40−45
+700%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−669%
300−310
+669%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
−700%
40−45
+700%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−700%
40−45
+700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−700%
24−27
+700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−700%
24−27
+700%
Hitman 3 8−9
−713%
65−70
+713%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−713%
65−70
+713%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
−733%
150−160
+733%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−650%
30−33
+650%

This is how UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) and Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

  • Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is 746% faster in 1080p
  • Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is 733% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.14 27.35
Recency 28 May 2019 26 February 2024
Chip lithography 10 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 35 Watt

UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) has 191.7% lower power consumption.

Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has a 771% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) is a notebook graphics card while RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation 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.


Intel UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU)
UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU)
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile

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.


3.7 370 votes

Rate UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 20 votes

Rate RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 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.