Radeon Pro 560 vs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Radeon Pro 560 vs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Radeon Pro 560 vs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

Radeon Pro 560

2017

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌2017 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌
400% HIGHER MSRP
$500 MSRPvs$100 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 7.0 vs 33.9 G3D/$ ($500 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
❌150% higher power demand at 75W vs 30W.

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7

2020

Why buy it

✅Costs $400 less on MSRP ($100 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Delivers 387.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 33.9 vs 7.0 G3D/$ ($100 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Radeon Pro 560 is already obsolete for modern gaming, so Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is the less risky modern option long term.
✅Draws 30W instead of 75W, a 45W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Older hardware, 2 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Radeon Pro 560 is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 2.5% in PassMark G3D (3,475 vs 3,390), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: a 10nm process instead of 14nm and a newer 2020 generation instead of 2017. That makes it the less risky pick as game demands keep moving.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $400 cheaper on MSRP at $100 vs $500, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 387.8% (33.9 vs 7.0), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. Radeon Pro 560 still makes more sense if max raw gaming performance matters more than value.

Radeon Pro 560 vs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Radeon Pro 560

The Radeon Pro 560 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 18 2017. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 907 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,475 points.

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7

The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is manufactured by an unknown manufacturer. It was released in August 15 2020. It features the Gen. 11 Ice Lake architecture. It has 96 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 10 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,390 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Radeon Pro 560 scores 3,475 and the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 reaches 3,390 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon Pro 560 is built on GCN 4.0 while the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 uses Gen. 11 Ice Lake, both on 14 nm vs 10 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (Radeon Pro 560) vs 96 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7).

Feature	Radeon Pro 560	Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
G3D Mark Score	3,475+3%	3,390
Architecture	GCN 4.0	Gen. 11 Ice Lake
Process Node	14 nm	10 nm
Shading Units	1024+967%	96

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Radeon Pro 560	Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
Upscaling Tech	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	AMD Anti-Lag	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards ship with 2 GB of GDDR5. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the Radeon Pro 560 and 64-bit on the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7.

Feature	Radeon Pro 560	Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon Pro 560 draws 75W versus the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7's 30W — a 85.7% difference. The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon Pro 560) vs 350W (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	Radeon Pro 560	Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
TDP	75W	30W-60%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	—	0mm
Height	—	0mm
Slots	—	0
Temp (Load)	—	85
Perf/Watt	46.3	113.0+144%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Radeon Pro 560 came in at $500, while the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 launched at $100. On MSRP, Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 was 80% cheaper ($400 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 7.0 (Radeon Pro 560) vs 33.9 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7) — the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 offers 384.3% better value. The newer card here is Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 (2020 vs 2017).

Feature	Radeon Pro 560	Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
MSRP	$500	$100-80%
Performance per Dollar	7.0	33.9+384%
Codename	Polaris 21	Tiger Lake Xe
Release	April 18 2017	August 15 2020
Ranking	#543	#508

Search Radeon Pro 560 on Amazon

Search Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.