Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 vs AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM
Comparative analysis of Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 and AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM 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 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 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 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 5.7x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 85 Watt
- 32x more maximum memory size: 64 GB vs 2 GB
- Around 11% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 509 vs 460
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 1 September 2015 vs 5 May 2015 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 85 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB vs 2 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 509 vs 460 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM
- 3.3x more core clock speed: 1000 MHz vs 300 MHz
- Around 5% higher boost clock speed: 1050 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- 10.7x more pipelines: 768 vs 72
- Around 36% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3032 vs 2231
- Around 43% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 14269 vs 10003
- 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3667 vs 1671
- 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3667 vs 1671
- Around 5% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3340 vs 3175
- Around 5% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3340 vs 3175
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1000 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
| Pipelines | 768 vs 72 |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3032 vs 2231 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14269 vs 10003 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3667 vs 1671 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3667 vs 1671 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3340 vs 3175 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3340 vs 3175 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 | AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2231 | 3032 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 509 | 460 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10003 | 14269 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1671 | 3667 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1671 | 3667 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3175 | 3340 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3175 | 3340 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 39.283 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 815.354 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.437 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 63.718 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 171.258 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4468 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4468 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 | AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 | GCN 2.0 |
| Code name | Skylake GT4e | Tobago |
| Launch date | 1 September 2015 | 5 May 2015 |
| Place in performance rating | 662 | 663 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1050 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 72 | 768 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 85 Watt |
| Transistor count | 189 million | 2,080 million |
| Floating-point performance | 1,613 gflops | |
| Texture fill rate | 50.4 GTexel / s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 165 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 64 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory type | DDR3L / LPDDR3 / DDR4 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
| Memory bandwidth | 104.0 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 6500 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 with others
IntelIris Pro Graphics P580 vs
NVIDIAGeForce PCX 5900
IntelIris Pro Graphics P580 vs
ATIFireMV 2200
IntelIris Pro Graphics P580 vs
AMDRadeon R7 250X
IntelIris Pro Graphics P580 vs
AMDRadeon R9 M280X
IntelIris Pro Graphics P580 vs
AMDRadeon R9 360 OEM
IntelIris Pro Graphics P580 vs
IntelUHD Graphics 730
