AMD FirePro W4190M vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200
Comparative analysis of AMD FirePro W4190M and Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro W4190M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- 2.8x more core clock speed: 825 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 8x more pipelines: 384 vs 48
- 5.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 23384 vs 4466
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2529 vs 958
- Around 69% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3889 vs 2304
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2529 vs 958
- Around 69% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3889 vs 2304
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 12 November 2015 vs 5 September 2014 |
| Core clock speed | 825 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Pipelines | 384 vs 48 |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 23384 vs 4466 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2529 vs 958 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3889 vs 2304 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2529 vs 958 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3889 vs 2304 |
Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200
- Around 28% higher boost clock speed: 1150 MHz vs 900 MHz
- 2.6x more texture fill rate: 55.2 GTexel / s vs 21.6 GTexel / s
- Around 28% better floating-point performance: 883.2 gflops vs 691.2 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- Around 27% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1461 vs 1148
- 3.2x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 569 vs 180
- Around 45% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2475 vs 1704
- Around 45% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2475 vs 1704
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Boost clock speed | 1150 MHz vs 900 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 55.2 GTexel / s vs 21.6 GTexel / s |
| Floating-point performance | 883.2 gflops vs 691.2 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1461 vs 1148 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 569 vs 180 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2475 vs 1704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2475 vs 1704 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD FirePro W4190M
GPU 2: Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD FirePro W4190M | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1148 | 1461 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 180 | 569 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 23384 | 4466 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 284.018 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.417 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1704 | 2475 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2529 | 958 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3889 | 2304 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1704 | 2475 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2529 | 958 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3889 | 2304 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD FirePro W4190M | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Generation 8.0 |
| Code name | Opal | Broadwell GT3e |
| Launch date | 12 November 2015 | 5 September 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 1066 | 789 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 900 MHz | 1150 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 825 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 691.2 gflops | 883.2 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 48 |
| Texture fill rate | 21.6 GTexel / s | 55.2 GTexel / s |
| Transistor count | 1,040 million | 189 million |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x1 |
| Laptop size | medium sized | medium sized |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 64 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | |
| Shared memory | 0 | 1 |
Technologies |
||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| Enduro | ||
| Powerplay | ||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD FirePro W4190M with others
AMDFirePro W4190M vs
NVIDIAGeForce4 MX 440-SE
AMDFirePro W4190M vs
NVIDIAGeForce FX Go5300
AMDFirePro W4190M vs
ATIMobility Radeon 9700
AMDFirePro W4190M vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9800 GT
AMDFirePro W4190M vs
NVIDIAQuadro K3100M
AMDFirePro W4190M vs
AMDRadeon R7 250E
