GeForce GTX 295 vs Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7
In this comparison between GeForce GTX 295 and Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 you will find out which graphics card performs better in today's games. Bear in mind that third-party versions may have more efficient cooling and higher clock speeds. This will increase cards' performance, though not by much. In addition to raw power you should also take into account the dimensions. Thicker models simply will not fit into a small mini-ITX case. The resolution of your monitor also affects the choice, since 4K gameplay requires a more powerful GPU. And don't overspend on the graphics card. Other parts of your build may also need to be upgraded, save some money for the CPU or power supply. For some people GeForce GTX 295 will be the best choice, for others Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
GeForce GTX 295
![](/static/img/graphics-card.jpg)
Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 here:
Main Specs
GeForce GTX 295 | Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 | |
Power consumption (TDP) | 289 Watt | |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | |
Supplementary power connectors | 6-pin & 8-pin | |
Memory type | GDDR3 | DDR4 |
Maximum RAM amount | 1792 MB | |
Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI | |
Check Price |
- GeForce GTX 295 is used in Desktops, and Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 - in Laptops.
- GeForce GTX 295 is build with Tesla 2.0 architecture, and Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 - with Gen. 11 Ice Lake.
- GeForce GTX 295 is manufactured by 55 nm process technology, and Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 - by 10 nm process technology.
Game benchmarks
high / 1080p | 3−4 | 12−14 |
ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 7−8 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 1−2 |
low / 720p | 14−16 | 30−33 |
medium / 1080p | 5−6 | 16−18 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 183% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
high / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 18−20 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 1−2 |
low / 720p | 18−20 | 45−50 |
medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 24−27 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in Battlefield 5 is 172% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
high / 1080p | 30−35 | 45−50 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 25% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 120−130 | 200−210 |
medium / 768p | 90−95 | 170−180 |
ultra / 1080p | 40−45 | 90−95 |
QHD / 1440p | 24−27 | 50−55 |
4K / 2160p | 18−20 | 24−27 |
high / 768p | 65−70 | 130−140 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 83% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 80−85 | 60−65 |
ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 35−40 |
medium / 1080p | 40−45 | 55−60 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 13% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 75−80 | 110−120 |
medium / 768p | 50−55 | 90−95 |
ultra / 1080p | 27−30 | 60−65 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in Dota 2 is 73% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
high / 1080p | 5−6 | 16−18 |
ultra / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
4K / 2160p | 2−3 | 5−6 |
low / 720p | 14−16 | 35−40 |
medium / 1080p | 6−7 | 18−20 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in Far Cry 5 is 171% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
high / 1080p | 12−14 | 21−24 |
ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 18−20 |
QHD / 1440p | − | 12−14 |
low / 720p | 50−55 | 95−100 |
medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 50−55 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in Fortnite is 113% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
high / 1080p | 7−8 | 24−27 |
ultra / 1080p | − | 18−20 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 6−7 |
low / 720p | 20−22 | 50−55 |
medium / 1080p | 9−10 | 27−30 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in Forza Horizon 4 is 191% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 45−50 | 80−85 |
medium / 768p | − | 70−75 |
high / 1080p | 8−9 | 27−30 |
ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 10−12 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 1−2 |
medium / 720p | 40−45 | − |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in Grand Theft Auto V is 100% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
high / 1080p | 3−4 | 8−9 |
ultra / 1080p | 1−2 | 6−7 |
4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
low / 720p | 8−9 | 27−30 |
medium / 1080p | 4−5 | 12−14 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in Metro Exodus is 250% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 85−90 | 110−120 |
high / 1080p | 85−90 | − |
ultra / 1080p | 80−85 | 100−110 |
medium / 1080p | 85−90 | 100−110 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in Minecraft is 27% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 14−16 |
low / 720p | 27−30 | 55−60 |
medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 18−20 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 66% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
high / 1080p | − | 12−14 |
ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 7−8 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
low / 720p | 8−9 | 27−30 |
medium / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 125% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 16−18 | 50−55 |
medium / 768p | 12−14 | 30−35 |
high / 1080p | 6−7 | 16−18 |
ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 10−11 |
4K / 2160p | − | 5−6 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 180% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
low / 768p | 70−75 | 90−95 |
medium / 768p | 35−40 | 60−65 |
ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 30−35 |
high / 768p | 30−35 | 50−55 |
The average gaming FPS of Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 in World of Tanks is 53% more, than GeForce GTX 295. |
Full Specs
GeForce GTX 295 | Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 | |
Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Gen. 11 Ice Lake |
Code name | GT200B | Tiger Lake Xe |
Type | Desktop | Laptop |
Release date | 8 January 2009 | 15 August 2020 |
Pipelines | 240 | 96 |
Core clock speed | 1242 MHz | |
Transistor count | 1,400 million | |
Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 10 nm |
Texture fill rate | 92.2 billion/sec | |
Floating-point performance | 2x 596.2 gflops | |
Length | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) | |
Memory bus width | 896 Bit | |
Memory clock speed | 999 MHz | |
Memory bandwidth | 223.8 GB/s | |
Shared memory | + | |
DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | DirectX 12_1 |
Shader Model | 4.0 | |
OpenGL | 2.1 | |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Vulkan | N/A | |
CUDA | + | |
CUDA cores | 480 | |
Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
SLI options | + | |
Multi monitor support | + | |
HDMI | + | |
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | |
Quick Sync | + | |
CUDA cores per GPU | 240 | |
Standard memory config per GPU | 896 MB | |
Memory interface width per GPU | 448 Bit | |
High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR) | 128bit | |
Check Price |
Similar compares
- GeForce GTX 295 vs Radeon HD 4850 X2
- GeForce GTX 295 vs Radeon R9 M275
- Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 vs Radeon HD 4850 X2
- Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 vs Radeon R9 M275
- GeForce GTX 295 vs GeForce GTX 950
- GeForce GTX 295 vs Radeon Pro WX 5100
- Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 vs GeForce GTX 950
- Tiger Lake U Xe Graphics G7 vs Radeon Pro WX 5100