AMD Radeon R7 260X vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R7 260X 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 260X
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 month(s) later
- 5.9x more texture fill rate: 61.6 GTexel / s vs 10.4 GTexel / s
- 22.4x more pipelines: 896 vs 40
- 19x better floating-point performance: 1,971 gflops vs 104.0 gflops
- 2.7x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3183 vs 1191
- Around 31% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 521 vs 399
- Around 84% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3845 vs 2095
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3485 vs 3285
- Around 84% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3845 vs 2095
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3485 vs 3285
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 8 October 2013 vs 27 May 2013 |
| Texture fill rate | 61.6 GTexel / s vs 10.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 896 vs 40 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,971 gflops vs 104.0 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3183 vs 1191 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 521 vs 399 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3845 vs 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3485 vs 3285 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3845 vs 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3485 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
- 3.8x lower typical power consumption: 30 Watt vs 115 Watt
| Boost clock speed | 1300 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt vs 115 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 260X
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 260X | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3183 | 1191 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 521 | 399 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 43.745 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 804.436 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.673 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 64.088 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 221.539 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3845 | 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3485 | 3285 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3845 | 2095 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3485 | 3285 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1481 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5081 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R7 260X | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Generation 7.5 |
| Code name | Bonaire | Haswell GT3e |
| Design | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
| Launch date | 8 October 2013 | 27 May 2013 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $139 | |
| Place in performance rating | 639 | 644 |
| Price now | $239 | |
| Type | Desktop | Laptop |
| Value for money (0-100) | 17.15 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1300 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 1,971 gflops | 104.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 22 nm |
| Pipelines | 896 | 40 |
| Stream Processors | 896 | |
| Texture fill rate | 61.6 GTexel / s | 10.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 115 Watt | 30 Watt |
| Transistor count | 2,080 million | 392 million |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x 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 | 170 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 | 4 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 104 GB/s | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | eDRAM |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon R7 260X with others
AMDRadeon R7 260X vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 1000
AMDRadeon R7 260X vs
NVIDIAQuadro NVS 210S
AMDRadeon R7 260X vs
NVIDIATesla K40m
AMDRadeon R7 260X vs
AMDFirePro W5100
AMDRadeon R7 260X vs
AMDRadeon R7 M270DX
AMDRadeon R7 260X vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
