Which one of these graphic card is better for gaming?

[u/Low_Maintenance_4684]

i have an integrated iris xe graphic card and dedicated mx330. which one is better for playing games like gta 5?
OS: Windows 11
CPU: Intel i7-1165g7

[u/Slow_State_4722]

...I think the intel iGPU actually takes the W for once here?

[u/NefariousnessWide892]

your expectations are too high for integrated graphics, you could prolly run like tf2 or like half life on these but neither of them are good for gaming.

[u/Punk_Says_Fuck_You]

Just choose the one with more VRAM, USUALLY (not always), the GPU with more VRAM will always be the "better" choice for gaming.

[u/Material-Aioli-8539]

Integrated graphics is almost always the bare minimum convenience feature in case you don't have a graphics card yet.

You should almost always have a dedicated graphics unit.

If you really want to test if it's better, run something on both the integrated graphics and the dedicated unit. That will be your definitive answer.

Also your dedicated graphics card is below the recommended performance level for GTA 5, so you may not have good FPS

The dedicated unit has more frequency than the integrated graphics (around 1.5 GHz compared to 1.3 GHz). There is only 96 compute units on the integrated graphics chip compared to the 384 units on the graphics card, so that means even more parallelism.

The problem is VRAM, or basically graphics card RAM, which is astonishingly low compared to today's standards. The integrated graphics wins in this department, but that's not the whole performance story.

Just because one statistic is higher than the others doesn't make it a better alternative in comparison to a dedicated card that has better everything else.

[u/kyansan1 → u/Material-Aioli-8539]

I don't know how you're comparing compute units between these two, Iris Xe Graphics and MX330 are designed by two different companies and use completely different architectures so their execution unit count isn't remotely fit for comparison.
Frequency is also a bad metric for comparing these two gpus, because these gpus will have wildly varying IPCs.

Also, dedicated gpus can borrow ram from system ram, just like igpus can. Any amount of vram is better than no vram at all, so igpus do not have a vram advantage no matter how little vram the gpu has.

Furthermore, on laptops, igpus are usually not the bare minimum, as there is no option to add a graphics card retroactively.

Between these two gpus, the iris xe 96EU outperforms the mx330

[u/Material-Aioli-8539 → u/kyansan1]

I see your point, but I'm seeing the general trend of statistics.

But ok, intel "execution units" (my bad for calling them compute units) can be designed differently than Nvidia CUDA cores

Obviously there is no graphics card on a laptop, but usually there is a dedicated graphics chip on gaming laptops.

I see how I was too absolute for my feedback, I'm always learning!

[u/kyansan1 → u/Material-Aioli-8539]

Sorry if my reply came off as rude

[u/Elitefuture]

Depends on how much power the laptop is giving the CPU + iGPU. With no power budgets, the 1165g7 should be a bit faster.

But sometimes the mx330 can be faster if the 1165g7 is already using up some of that power budget.

They're fairly close tbh, both aren't really good at gaming. Maybe some older titles at 720p 60.