AMD Radeon R7 250X vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R7 250X and Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 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, 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, Geekbench - OpenCL.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 250X
- Videocard is newer: launch date 8 month(s) later
- 3.7x more texture fill rate: 38 GTexel / s vs 10.4 GTexel / s
- 16x more pipelines: 640 vs 40
- 11.7x better floating-point performance: 1,216 gflops vs 104.0 gflops
- Around 92% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2269 vs 1180
- Around 63% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 637 vs 390
- Around 87% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3916 vs 2095
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3716 vs 3285
- Around 87% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3916 vs 2095
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3716 vs 3285
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 13 February 2014 vs 27 May 2013 |
| Texture fill rate | 38 GTexel / s vs 10.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 640 vs 40 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,216 gflops vs 104.0 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2269 vs 1180 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 637 vs 390 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3916 vs 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3716 vs 3285 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3916 vs 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3716 vs 3285 |
Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
- Around 30% higher boost clock speed: 1300 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 22 nm vs 28 nm
- 2.7x lower typical power consumption: 30 Watt vs 80 Watt
| Boost clock speed | 1300 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt vs 80 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 250X
GPU 2: Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon R7 250X | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2269 | 1180 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 637 | 390 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 32.22 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 638.532 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.963 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.987 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 151.963 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3916 | 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3716 | 3285 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3916 | 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3716 | 3285 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5083 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R7 250X | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Generation 7.5 |
| Code name | Cape Verde | Haswell GT3e |
| Design | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
| Launch date | 13 February 2014 | 27 May 2013 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $99 | |
| Place in performance rating | 659 | 661 |
| Price now | $260.70 | |
| Type | Desktop | Laptop |
| Value for money (0-100) | 11.25 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1300 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 1,216 gflops | 104.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 22 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 40 |
| Stream Processors | 640 | |
| Texture fill rate | 38 GTexel / s | 10.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 80 Watt | 30 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,500 million | 392 million |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| Dual-link DVI support | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Length | 210 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1 x 6-pin | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.3 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 1625 MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | eDRAM |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon R7 250X with others
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDRadeon HD 6970
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
IntelIris Pro Graphics 5200
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDFirePro D300
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDRadeon R9 M280X
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDFirePro W6150M
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q
