Intel UHD Graphics 615 vs AMD Radeon R7 M265
Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 615 and AMD Radeon R7 M265 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, 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel UHD Graphics 615
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- Around 27% higher boost clock speed: 1050 MHz vs 825 MHz
- 1272.7x more texture fill rate: 25.2 GTexel/s vs 19.8 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 4x more maximum memory size: 16 GB vs 4 GB
- Around 34% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 732 vs 546
- Around 30% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 180 vs 138
- Around 53% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 18.422 vs 12.031
- Around 36% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1720 vs 1264
- Around 36% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1720 vs 1264
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 7 November 2018 vs 20 May 2014 |
Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz vs 825 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel/s vs 19.8 GTexel / s |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Maximum memory size | 16 GB vs 4 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 732 vs 546 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 180 vs 138 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 18.422 vs 12.031 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1720 vs 1264 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1720 vs 1264 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 M265
- 3x more core clock speed: 900 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 16x more pipelines: 384 vs 24
- Around 57% better floating-point performance: 633.6 gflops vs 403.2 gflops
- Around 73% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5587 vs 3229
- Around 27% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 282.111 vs 221.42
- Around 14% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.455 vs 1.277
- Around 77% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 21.704 vs 12.269
- 3.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 68.392 vs 18.909
- Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1551 vs 1256
- Around 37% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2424 vs 1772
- Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1551 vs 1256
- Around 37% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2424 vs 1772
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 900 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Pipelines | 384 vs 24 |
Floating-point performance | 633.6 gflops vs 403.2 gflops |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5587 vs 3229 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 282.111 vs 221.42 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.455 vs 1.277 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.704 vs 12.269 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 68.392 vs 18.909 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1551 vs 1256 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2424 vs 1772 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1551 vs 1256 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2424 vs 1772 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 615
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 M265
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
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) |
|
|
Name | Intel UHD Graphics 615 | AMD Radeon R7 M265 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 732 | 546 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 180 | 138 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3229 | 5587 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 18.422 | 12.031 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 221.42 | 282.111 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.277 | 1.455 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.269 | 21.704 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 18.909 | 68.392 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1256 | 1551 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1720 | 1264 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1772 | 2424 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1256 | 1551 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1720 | 1264 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1772 | 2424 |
Compare specifications (specs)
Intel UHD Graphics 615 | AMD Radeon R7 M265 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Generation 9.5 | GCN 3.0 |
Code name | Kaby Lake GT2 | Topaz |
Launch date | 7 November 2018 | 20 May 2014 |
Place in performance rating | 1411 | 1413 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Design | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | 825 MHz |
Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 900 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 403.2 gflops | 633.6 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 100.8 GFLOPS | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 806.4 GFLOPS | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 403.2 GFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 24 | 384 |
Pixel fill rate | 3.150 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel/s | 19.8 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt | |
Transistor count | 189 million | 3,100 million |
Compute units | 6 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 x8 | |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 11 |
OpenCL | 2.1 | Not Listed |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
Vulkan | ||
Mantle | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 128 bit |
Memory type | DDR3L / LPDDR3 | DDR3 |
Shared memory | Yes | 0 |
Memory bandwidth | 32 GB/s | |
Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
Quick Sync | ||
DualGraphics | ||
FreeSync | ||
HD3D | ||
PCIe 3.0 | ||
PowerTune | ||
Switchable graphics | ||
Zero Core | ||
ZeroCore |