AMD Radeon RX 640 vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon RX 640 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: GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), Geekbench - OpenCL, PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon RX 640
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 8 month(s) later
- 3.6x more core clock speed: 1082 MHz vs 300 MHz
- Around 6% higher boost clock speed: 1218 MHz vs 1150 MHz
- 706.2x more texture fill rate: 38.98 GTexel/s vs 55.2 GTexel / s
- 10.7x more pipelines: 512 vs 48
- Around 85% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1769 vs 958
- Around 85% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1769 vs 958
- Around 20% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2775 vs 2304
- Around 20% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2775 vs 2304
- Around 32% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3278 vs 2475
- Around 32% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3278 vs 2475
- 2.6x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 11459 vs 4471
- Around 44% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2116 vs 1472
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 13 May 2019 vs 5 September 2014 |
| Core clock speed | 1082 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1218 MHz vs 1150 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 38.98 GTexel/s vs 55.2 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 512 vs 48 |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1769 vs 958 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1769 vs 958 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2775 vs 2304 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2775 vs 2304 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3278 vs 2475 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3278 vs 2475 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11459 vs 4471 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2116 vs 1472 |
Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200
- 3.3x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 50 Watt
- Around 61% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 565 vs 352
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 50 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 565 vs 352 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 640
GPU 2: Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon RX 640 | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1769 | 958 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1769 | 958 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2775 | 2304 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2775 | 2304 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3278 | 2475 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3278 | 2475 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11459 | 4471 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 352 | 565 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2116 | 1472 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon RX 640 | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Generation 8.0 |
| Code name | Arctic Islands | Broadwell GT3e |
| Launch date | 13 May 2019 | 5 September 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 802 | 799 |
| Type | Laptop | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1218 MHz | 1150 MHz |
| Compute units | 8 | |
| Core clock speed | 1082 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 77.95 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 1247 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 1247 GFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 512 | 48 |
| Pixel fill rate | 19.49 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 38.98 GTexel/s | 55.2 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Transistor count | 2200 million | 189 million |
| Floating-point performance | 883.2 gflops | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| HDMI | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x1 |
| Length | 5.7 inches (145 mm) | |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 350 Watt | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
| Width | Dual-slot | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | |
| Memory bus width | 128 bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz (7000 MHz effective) | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
Technologies |
||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon RX 640 with others
AMDRadeon RX 640 vs
ATIRadeon HD 4250
AMDRadeon RX 640 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K2200
AMDRadeon RX 640 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 830A
AMDRadeon RX 640 vs
IntelIris Pro Graphics 6200
AMDRadeon RX 640 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K1200
AMDRadeon RX 640 vs
NVIDIAQuadro P500
