Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data provides a single direct comparison: Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics scores 14315, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 scores 13300. That gives Intel a 7.6% lead in raw compute performance. The win is decisive but not overwhelming — it’s a solid margin, not a blowout.

Context matters here. The Iris Xe MAX sits at the 56th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 480 sits at the 53rd. That’s a narrow gap in overall standing, but the Intel part edges ahead in the one metric that matters for this comparison. When you look at the nearest rivals for each card, the picture gets more interesting. The Iris Xe MAX is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon Vega 11 (14352, -0.3% delta) and slightly ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN (14373, -0.4% delta from the rival’s perspective, meaning Intel is 0.4% behind). The GTX 480, meanwhile, trades blows with AMD’s mobile and older parts: the Radeon Pro 555X (13321, -0.2% delta), FirePro M6100 (13354, -0.4%), and RX 5500M (13356, -0.4%). In other words, the GTX 480’s score is competitive with a set of mid-range mobile GPUs, while the Iris Xe MAX is competing with desktop-class parts from a generation later.

The 7.6% delta in OpenCL is the only head-to-head data point, so it carries the full weight of the performance verdict. For compute workloads that scale with OpenCL, the Intel card is the clear winner. The GTX 480 does not win any benchmark in this comparison — the wins tally is 1 for Intel, 0 for NVIDIA.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different eras and design philosophies. The Intel Iris Xe MAX is built on the DG1 chip, using Intel’s Generation 12.1 architecture — part of the Xe Graphics generation. It’s fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel’s own foundry. The die size is a compact 95 mm². By contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 uses the GF100 chip, based on the Fermi architecture, from the GeForce 400 generation. It’s built on a 40 nm process at TSMC, with a massive 529 mm² die and 3,100 million transistors — a transistor density of 5.9M per mm².

The process node difference is stark: 10 nm versus 40 nm is a four-generation jump in lithography. That explains why Intel can pack 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs into a 95 mm² die, while NVIDIA needs 529 mm² for its 480 shading units, 60 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The Intel chip has more shaders but fewer TMUs and ROPs — a trade-off that favors compute throughput over texture and pixel work.

Memory architectures diverge sharply as well. The Iris Xe MAX uses 4 GB of LPDDR4X on a 128-bit bus, delivering 68.26 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 480 uses 1536 MB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 177.4 GB/s — more than 2.5 times the bandwidth. But the Intel card compensates with a much higher boost clock: 1650 MHz versus the GTX 480’s memory clock of 924 MHz (3.7 Gbps effective). The GPU core clocks aren’t directly comparable since the GTX 480 lists no base or boost figures, but the Intel part’s 300 MHz base and 1650 MHz boost show a wide dynamic range.

Feature support also differs. The Iris Xe MAX supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 480 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) — a lower feature level — OpenGL 4.6, but no Vulkan at all. That’s a significant modern-compute gap. The Intel card also outputs no display signals (it’s an IGP), while the GTX 480 has 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a outputs. Power delivery reflects the era: the GTX 480 requires a 250 W TDP, a dual-slot cooler, and both 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 600 W. The Iris Xe MAX runs at 25 W TDP, is an IGP (integrated graphics processor), and needs only a 200 W PSU.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Iris Xe MAX wins the only direct benchmark — Geekbench OpenCL — by 7.6%. That makes it the stronger choice for compute-heavy tasks that leverage OpenCL: things like GPGPU workloads, encoding, and any application that scales with raw shader throughput. Its 2.534 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 5.069 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1) are substantial for a 25 W part. The GTX 480’s FP32 is 1,345.0 GFLOPS — roughly half of Intel’s figure — and it has no FP16 support listed at all. If your workload is modern compute, the Intel card is the one to pick.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480, despite losing the benchmark, has its own strengths from the data. Its memory bandwidth of 177.4 GB/s is a massive advantage — more than 2.5 times the Intel part’s 68.26 GB/s. For workloads that are bandwidth-limited rather than compute-limited, the GTX 480 would likely pull ahead, even if the OpenCL score doesn’t show it. The GTX 480 also has more ROPs (48 versus 24) and a wider 384-bit bus, which suggests better fill-rate performance for pixel-heavy rendering. Its pixel rate of 21.03 GPixel/s and texture rate of 42.06 GTexel/s are lower than Intel’s 39.60 GPixel/s and 79.20 GTexel/s, though — so Intel wins on raw throughput there too.

The GTX 480’s 4 GB advantage? No — it has 1536 MB, which is less than half of Intel’s 4 GB. That’s a clear win for Intel in capacity. The GTX 480’s display outputs are its practical advantage: it can drive monitors directly, while the Iris Xe MAX has no outputs and must be paired with a separate display adapter.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Iris Xe MAX | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 |

|----------------|-------------------|------------------------|

| Process Node | 10 nm | 40 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 95 mm² | 529 mm² |

| Transistors | Not listed | 3,100 million |

| Transistor Density | Not listed | 5.9M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 1536 MB |

| Memory Type | LPDDR4X | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 68.26 GB/s | 177.4 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 2133 MHz / 4.3 Gbps | 924 MHz / 3.7 Gbps |

| Shading Units | 768 | 480 |

| TMUs | 48 | 60 |

| ROPs | 24 | 48 |

| FP32 | 2.534 TFLOPS | 1,345.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 5.069 TFLOPS (2:1) | Not listed |

| TDP | 25 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 200 W | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2020-10-30 | 2010-03-25 |

| Predecessor | Graphics | GeForce 200 |

| Successor | Alchemist | GeForce 500 |

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Intel Iris Xe MAX scores 14315 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 7.6% higher than the GTX 480’s 13300. It also has higher FP32 (2.534 TFLOPS vs 1,345.0 GFLOPS) and supports FP16, which the GTX 480 does not list.

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

A: The GTX 480 has a wider 384-bit bus and more bandwidth at 177.4 GB/s, versus the Intel card’s 128-bit bus and 68.26 GB/s. However, the Intel card has 4 GB of memory versus the GTX 480’s 1536 MB, giving Intel a 2.67x capacity advantage.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The Iris Xe MAX has a 25 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 200 W. The GTX 480 has a 250 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 600 W — a 10x difference in TDP and a 3x difference in PSU requirement.

Q: Can either card output video to a monitor?

A: No for the Intel card — it has no display outputs. Yes for the GTX 480, which includes 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a.

Q: What are their production statuses?

A: Both are end-of-life. The Intel card was released 2020-10-30 and its successor is Alchemist. The GTX 480 was released 2010-03-25, with the GeForce 500 as its successor.

Q: How does each card rank among all GPUs?

A: The Iris Xe MAX sits at the 56th percentile, while the GTX 480 sits at the 53rd. The Intel card’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Vega 11 (14352, -0.3% delta), while the GTX 480’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro 555X (13321, -0.2% delta).

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but nuanced answer. For modern compute workloads measured by OpenCL, the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics is the better performer — it wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 7.6%, has more than double the FP32 throughput, supports FP16 and Vulkan, and does all of this at a 25 W TDP. If you’re building a system that prioritizes compute density, low power, and modern API support, the Intel part is the obvious choice.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480, however, retains value in one specific area: memory bandwidth. Its 177.4 GB/s is a 2.6x advantage, and its 384-bit bus is a relic of a high-end design philosophy that prioritized fill-rate and bandwidth over efficiency. For legacy applications that are bandwidth-bound, or for systems that need display outputs without a separate GPU, the GTX 480 has a practical edge — but its 250 W TDP, dual-slot cooler, and 600 W PSU requirement make it a poor fit for modern, power-conscious builds.

The percentile rankings tell the story: Intel at 56th, NVIDIA at 53rd — a three-percentile gap that matches the 7.6% benchmark delta. The GTX 480’s nearest rivals are all mobile or older AMD parts, while the Iris Xe MAX trades blows with desktop-class cards like the GTX TITAN and Vega 11. That’s a generation-defining shift: a 10 nm integrated GPU from 2020 outperforming a 40 nm flagship from 2010 in compute, while using one-tenth the power.

For most builders, the verdict is straightforward: if you need compute performance, modern API support, and efficiency, choose the Intel Iris Xe MAX. If you need raw memory bandwidth, display outputs, and don’t care about power draw or size, the GTX 480 still has a niche — but it’s a narrow one, and the data supports Intel as the overall winner.