NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M 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: 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 6 month(s) later
• 3x more core clock speed: 914 MHz vs 300 MHz
• 13.3x more pipelines: 640 vs 48
• Around 63% better floating-point performance: 1,439 gflops vs 883.2 gflops
• Around 77% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2587 vs 1461
• 2.1x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9507 vs 4463
• Around 68% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4148 vs 2475
• 3.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 958
• Around 46% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 2304
• Around 68% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4148 vs 2475
• 3.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 958
• Around 46% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 2304

Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200

• Around 2% higher boost clock speed: 1150 MHz vs 1124 MHz
• Around 23% higher texture fill rate: 55.2 GTexel / s vs 44.96 GTexel / s
• 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
• 2.6x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 569 vs 216

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
GPU 2: Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2587 1461
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	216 569
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	9507 4463
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4148 2475
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 958
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 2304
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4148 2475
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 958
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 2304

Compare specifications (specs)