AMD Radeon 625 vs Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon 625 and Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640 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 - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon 625

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 4 month(s) later
• 2.4x more core clock speed: 730 MHz vs 300 MHz
• 8x more pipelines: 384 vs 48
• Around 31% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 322.556 vs 246.614
• Around 53% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 32.22 vs 21.014
• Around 64% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 70.423 vs 42.981
• Around 93% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2920 vs 1514
• Around 93% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2920 vs 1514

Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640

• Around 7% higher boost clock speed: 1100 MHz vs 1024 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• 3.3x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 50 Watt
• 16x more maximum memory size: 32 GB vs 2 GB
• Around 27% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1364 vs 1074
• Around 63% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 339 vs 208
• Around 1% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 6590 vs 6501
• Around 93% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 36.485 vs 18.876
• Around 28% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.888 vs 1.478
• Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2306 vs 2032
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3333 vs 3215
• Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2306 vs 2032
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3333 vs 3215

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon 625
GPU 2: Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1074 1364
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	208 339
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	6501 6590
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	18.876 36.485
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	322.556 246.614
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.478 1.888
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	32.22 21.014
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	70.423 42.981
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2032 2306
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2920 1514
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3215 3333
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2032 2306
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2920 1514
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3215 3333

Compare specifications (specs)