Intel UHD Graphics 617 vs AMD Radeon R7 M260X
Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 617 and AMD Radeon R7 M260X 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: Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel UHD Graphics 617
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- Around 47% higher boost clock speed: 1050 MHz vs 715 MHz
- 1468.5x more texture fill rate: 25.20 GTexel/s vs 17.16 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- Around 44% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 232 vs 161
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 7 November 2018 vs 6 December 2015 |
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz vs 715 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 25.20 GTexel/s vs 17.16 GTexel / s |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 232 vs 161 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 M260X
- 2.1x more core clock speed: 620 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 16x more pipelines: 384 vs 24
- Around 75% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5753 vs 3292
- Around 44% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1893 vs 1313
- Around 44% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1893 vs 1313
- Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1775 vs 1461
- Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1775 vs 1461
- Around 93% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3158 vs 1633
- Around 93% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3158 vs 1633
- Around 13% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 986 vs 874
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 620 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Pipelines | 384 vs 24 |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5753 vs 3292 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1893 vs 1313 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1893 vs 1313 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1775 vs 1461 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1775 vs 1461 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3158 vs 1633 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3158 vs 1633 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 986 vs 874 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 617
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 M260X
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
| Name | Intel UHD Graphics 617 | AMD Radeon R7 M260X |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3292 | 5753 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1313 | 1893 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1313 | 1893 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1461 | 1775 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1461 | 1775 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1633 | 3158 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1633 | 3158 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 232 | 161 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 874 | 986 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel UHD Graphics 617 | AMD Radeon R7 M260X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.5 | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | Amber Lake GT2 | Opal |
| Launch date | 7 November 2018 | 6 December 2015 |
| Place in performance rating | 1223 | 1224 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
| Design | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | 715 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 620 MHz |
| 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 | 25.20 GTexel/s | 17.16 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | |
| Compute units | 6 | |
| Floating-point performance | 549.1 gflops | |
| Transistor count | 1,040 million | |
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 | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | 2.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.3 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
| Mantle | ||
Memory |
||
| Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 128 bit |
| Memory type | DDR3L / LPDDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 64 GB/s | |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| DualGraphics | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| PCIe 3.0 | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| Switchable graphics | ||
| Zero Core | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare Intel UHD Graphics 617 with others
IntelUHD Graphics 617 vs
ATIRadeon 9200 SE
IntelUHD Graphics 617 vs
NVIDIAGeForce FX 5900 ZT
IntelUHD Graphics 617 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 940M
IntelUHD Graphics 617 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 930M
IntelUHD Graphics 617 vs
AMDRadeon R7 M260X
IntelUHD Graphics 617 vs
IntelIris Plus Graphics 940
