AMD Radeon HD 7970M vs Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 7970M scores 17019, which is 18.9% ahead of the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics score of 14315.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon HD 7970M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It sits within 1.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070, which scores 17208, and it is 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 at 17037. It also edges out the NVIDIA Tesla M4 by 0.5%.

Q: What is the performance context for the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics?

A: Its score of 14315 places it nearly level with the AMD Radeon Vega 11, which is 0.3% higher at 14352, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN, which is 0.4% higher at 14373. It is 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti.

Q: What are the memory configurations of these two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 7970M has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics has 4 GB of LPDDR4X memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 68.26 GB/s.

Q: How do their power requirements differ?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 7970M has a 100 W TDP and uses an MXM Module slot, while the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics has a 25 W TDP, is an IGP, and suggests a 200 W power supply.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: Both are end-of-life. The AMD Radeon HD 7970M was released in April 2012, and the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics was released in October 2020.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows a clear single winner in raw compute: the AMD Radeon HD 7970M takes the only recorded head-to-head test, the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, by a margin of 18.9%. This is a substantial lead, and it reflects the AMD part's higher memory bandwidth and wider bus, which are critical for compute-heavy workloads.

However, the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics has its own territory where it wins by design, if not by benchmark score. The data shows it draws only 25 W compared to 100 W for the AMD part, making it suitable for compact, power-constrained systems where the AMD MXM module would be impractical. The Intel part also offers 4 GB of memory versus 2 GB, which is useful for workloads that need larger working sets, even if the bandwidth is lower.

For users who prioritize raw OpenCL compute performance, the AMD Radeon HD 7970M is the clear pick. For users who need an integrated solution with low power draw and a smaller footprint, the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics is the only option that fits those constraints. The data does not show any benchmark where the Intel part wins, but its architecture and specifications carve out a different use case entirely.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon HD 7970M is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture, specifically the Wimbledon chip, and it belongs to the London generation of the HD 7900M series. It uses a 28 nm process from TSMC, with 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. This is a mature, power-hungry design from 2012.

The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics uses the DG1 chip with the Generation 12.1 architecture, part of the Xe Graphics generation. It is fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process, with a die size of 95 mm². The transistor count is not recorded in the database, but the smaller die size and newer process node indicate a fundamentally different design philosophy: lower power, higher integration, and a focus on efficiency rather than raw throughput.

In terms of compute units, the AMD part has 1280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Intel part has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. Despite having fewer units, the Intel GPU achieves a higher pixel rate of 39.60 GPixel/s versus 27.20 GPixel/s, and a higher texture rate of 79.20 GTexel/s versus 68.00 GTexel/s. This is due to the Intel part's higher boost clock of 1650 MHz, while the AMD part has no recorded boost clock.

The AMD GPU supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Intel GPU supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which gives it a more modern feature set for current APIs. The Intel part also has FP16 support at 5.069 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the AMD part has no recorded FP16 capability.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The AMD Radeon HD 7970M has a 28 nm process node from TSMC, while the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics uses Intel's 10 nm process. The AMD die is 212 mm² with 2,800 million transistors, while the Intel die is 95 mm² with no recorded transistor count.

Memory configurations diverge sharply: the AMD part has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel part has 4 GB of LPDDR4X on a 128-bit bus with 68.26 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD memory clock is 1200 MHz with 4.8 Gbps effective, while the Intel memory clock is 2133 MHz with 4.3 Gbps effective.

Shading resources differ as well: AMD has 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while Intel has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The pixel rate favors Intel at 39.60 GPixel/s versus 27.20 GPixel/s, and the texture rate also favors Intel at 79.20 GTexel/s versus 68.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute favors Intel at 2.534 TFLOPS versus 2.176 TFLOPS, and Intel also has FP16 capability.

Power and form factor are major differentiators. The AMD GPU has a 100 W TDP, uses an MXM Module slot, and has no power connectors listed. The Intel GPU has a 25 W TDP, is an IGP, and suggests a 200 W power supply. The bus interface differs: AMD uses MXM-B (3.0), while Intel uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs also differ: the AMD part is "Portable Device Dependent," while the Intel part has no outputs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL, and the AMD Radeon HD 7970M wins decisively. Its score of 17019 beats the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics score of 14315 by 18.9%. This is a significant margin that places the AMD part in a different performance tier for compute workloads.

To put this in context, the AMD part's score of 17019 puts it within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690, which scores 17037, and within 1.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070, which scores 17208. The Intel part's score of 14315 is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon Vega 11 at 14352, a difference of only 0.3%.

The delta of 18.9% between the two parts is larger than any of the differences between either GPU and its nearest rivals. This suggests that the performance gap is structural, driven by fundamental architecture and memory bandwidth differences, rather than a close contest. The AMD part's 153.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is more than double the Intel part's 68.26 GB/s, which is likely a major factor in the OpenCL result.

The Intel part does have higher raw FP32 throughput at 2.534 TFLOPS versus 2.176 TFLOPS, but this does not translate into a benchmark win. The AMD part's higher memory bandwidth and wider bus appear to be more impactful for the actual workload measured in Geekbench OpenCL.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split decision based on use case. For anyone prioritizing OpenCL compute performance, the AMD Radeon HD 7970M is the stronger choice. It leads by 18.9% in the only recorded benchmark, and its nearest rivals are high-end desktop parts like the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070, within 1.1% of its score. This is a legacy part that still holds its own in compute tasks.

For anyone building a low-power or compact system, the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics is the only viable option. Its 25 W TDP is a quarter of the AMD part's 100 W TDP, it is an IGP rather than an MXM module, and it offers 4 GB of memory versus 2 GB. Its benchmark score of 14315 is respectable, placing it near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN, and its modern API support, including Vulkan 1.4, makes it more future-proof for software compatibility.

The AMD Radeon HD 7970M is for users who need raw compute and have the power budget and chassis space for an MXM module. The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics is for users who need an efficient, integrated GPU with a small footprint and lower power draw. Neither part is still in production, but the data shows they serve completely different segments of the market.