RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs with RTX 2000 Ada Generation, including specs and performance data.

UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs
2021
4.31

RTX 2000 Ada Generation outperforms UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs by a whopping 971% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking67072
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data81.72
Power efficiencyno data45.85
ArchitectureGen. 12 (2021−2023)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeAD107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date30 March 2021 (3 years ago)12 February 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$649

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 cores322816
Core clock speed350 MHz1620 MHz
Boost clock speed1450 MHz2130 MHz
Number of transistorsno data18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data70 Watt
Texture fill rateno data187.4
Floating-point processing powerno data12 TFLOPS
ROPsno data48
TMUsno data88
Tensor Coresno data88
Ray Tracing Coresno data22

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 x8
Lengthno data168 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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data16 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data256.0 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 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-8.9

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 HD16
−963%
170−180
+963%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−900%
120−130
+900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 11
−900%
110−120
+900%
Battlefield 5 18
−956%
190−200
+956%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−900%
100−105
+900%
Far Cry 5 14
−900%
140−150
+900%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−900%
120−130
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−937%
280−290
+937%
Hitman 3 16
−963%
170−180
+963%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−934%
300−310
+934%
Red Dead Redemption 2 13
−900%
130−140
+900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−963%
170−180
+963%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−923%
450−500
+923%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−900%
120−130
+900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9
−956%
95−100
+956%
Battlefield 5 16
−963%
170−180
+963%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−900%
100−105
+900%
Far Cry 5 13
−900%
130−140
+900%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−900%
120−130
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−937%
280−290
+937%
Hitman 3 12
−900%
120−130
+900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−934%
300−310
+934%
Metro Exodus 6
−900%
60−65
+900%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4
−900%
40−45
+900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−963%
170−180
+963%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−959%
180−190
+959%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−923%
450−500
+923%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−900%
120−130
+900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Battlefield 5 15
−967%
160−170
+967%
Far Cry 5 12
−900%
120−130
+900%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−900%
120−130
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−937%
280−290
+937%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−959%
180−190
+959%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−923%
450−500
+923%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Hitman 3 9−10
−956%
95−100
+956%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−900%
100−105
+900%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−963%
85−90
+963%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Battlefield 5 8−9
−963%
85−90
+963%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−900%
70−75
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−900%
70−75
+900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−937%
280−290
+937%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Hitman 3 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Battlefield 5 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%

This is how UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs and RTX 2000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 963% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.31 46.15
Recency 30 March 2021 12 February 2024
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm

RTX 2000 Ada Generation has a 970.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs is a notebook card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation is a 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 Xe 750 32EUs
UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs
NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation
RTX 2000 Ada Generation

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 15 votes

Rate UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 24 votes

Rate RTX 2000 Ada Generation 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.