Intel Iris Graphics 540 vs AMD Radeon R7 250
Comparative analysis of Intel Iris Graphics 540 and AMD Radeon R7 250 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, 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, 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Graphics 540
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 10 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 5x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 75 Watt
- Around 17% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1258 vs 1073
- Around 12% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 323 vs 289
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2308 vs 2179
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2308 vs 2179
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 1 September 2015 vs 8 October 2013 |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 75 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1258 vs 1073 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 323 vs 289 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2308 vs 2179 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2308 vs 2179 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 250
- 8x more pipelines: 384 vs 48
- 32x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 64 MB
- Around 42% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 8916 vs 6284
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3170 vs 1237
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3356 vs 3158
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3170 vs 1237
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3356 vs 3158
Specifications (specs) | |
Pipelines | 384 vs 48 |
Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 64 MB |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8916 vs 6284 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3170 vs 1237 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 vs 3158 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3170 vs 1237 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 vs 3158 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel Iris Graphics 540
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 250
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 | Intel Iris Graphics 540 | AMD Radeon R7 250 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1258 | 1073 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 323 | 289 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 6284 | 8916 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2308 | 2179 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1237 | 3170 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3158 | 3356 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2308 | 2179 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1237 | 3170 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3158 | 3356 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 0 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 20.161 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 304.279 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.655 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.046 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 96.934 |
Compare specifications (specs)
Intel Iris Graphics 540 | AMD Radeon R7 250 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Generation 9.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | Skylake GT3e | Oland |
Launch date | 1 September 2015 | 8 October 2013 |
Place in performance rating | 1057 | 1088 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Design | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
Launch price (MSRP) | $89 | |
Price now | $78.34 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 27.62 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | 1050 MHz |
Core clock speed | 300 MHz | |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 48 | 384 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 75 Watt |
Transistor count | 189 million | 1,040 million |
Floating-point performance | 716.8 gflops | |
Stream Processors | 384 | |
Texture fill rate | 22.4 GTexel / s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
DisplayPort support | ||
Dual-link DVI support | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
Length | 168 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | N / A | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 64 MB | 2 GB |
Memory type | eDRAM | DDR3 / GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 1 | 0 |
Memory bandwidth | 72 GB/s | |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | |
Memory clock speed | 1150 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
Quick Sync | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync |