AMD FirePro W600 vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 Comparison

The Verdict

The data positions the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 and AMD FirePro W600 as fundamentally different tools with contrasting strengths. The Intel part, an integrated solution from the Skylake era, dominates the single recorded head-to-head benchmark, while the AMD FirePro W600, a dedicated workstation card, offers a different set of physical and architectural characteristics. Benchmark results indicate the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 is the clear performance winner in the available test, but the AMD FirePro W600 brings dedicated memory and professional connectivity to the table. The recorded data suggests the P580 should be the pick for users prioritizing raw compute throughput in a low-power, integrated package, while the W600 serves scenarios requiring robust multi-display output and dedicated VRAM. These are end-of-life products, so the choice hinges entirely on specific workload needs rather than future-proofing.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers and design philosophies. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 is built on the Skylake GT4e chip using Intel's Generation 9.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm+ process at Intel's own foundry. It operates as an IGP with a Ring Bus interface, meaning it is integrated into the processor package and shares system memory. The AMD FirePro W600, by contrast, uses the Cape Verde chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The W600 is a discrete card with a PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface, a single-slot form factor, and no power connectors.

The Intel part's integrated nature means its memory configuration is "System Shared" across size, type, and bus width, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." The AMD card features a dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory pool on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a fundamental architectural split: the P580 relies on the host system's memory subsystem, while the W600 has its own dedicated frame buffer.

Compute resources differ as well. The Intel P580 packs 576 shading units, 72 texture mapping units, and 9 raster operation pipelines. The AMD W600 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Intel part also supports half-precision compute at 2.304 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the AMD card lists no FP16 capability. The W600's transistor count is listed at 1,500 million on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.2M per mm². The Intel part does not have listed transistor or die size data.

API support shows generational differences. The Intel P580 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The AMD W600 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Intel part has a higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version. The AMD card's display output is explicitly listed as 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2, while the Intel IGP's outputs are "Motherboard Dependent." The P580 has a 15 W TDP, while the W600 draws 75 W and lists a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct comparison between these two GPUs: the Geekbench OpenCL test. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 scores 9082, while the AMD FirePro W600 scores 6223. This gives the Intel part a 45.9% advantage, a substantial margin that places it firmly ahead in this compute-oriented workload. The delta is large enough to be decisive for OpenCL-centric applications.

Context from the nearest rivals helps interpret these numbers. The Intel P580's average benchmark score is 7170, placing it at the 39th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE at 7171 (a 0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 at 7157 (0.2% ahead of the P580), the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile at 7203 (0.5% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 at 7222 (0.7% ahead). The P580 essentially trades blows with these older discrete cards, sitting right in that performance band. Its OpenCL score of 9082 is notably higher than its average, indicating this particular workload plays to its strengths.

The AMD FirePro W600 has an average benchmark score of 6223, identical to its OpenCL result, and sits at the 36th percentile. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 6950 at 6210 (0.2% behind the W600), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 at 6270 (0.7% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER at 6270 (0.7% ahead), and the NVIDIA Quadro K620 at 6282 (0.9% ahead). The W600's performance cluster is remarkably tight, with all rivals within about 1% of its score. This suggests the W600's compute performance is well characterized by its 6223 average and that the 45.9% gap to the Intel part is a genuine, reproducible difference.

The data also shows the W600 has no recorded Vulkan benchmark, while the Intel P580 scores 5258 in Geekbench Vulkan. This gives the Intel part a second data point that the AMD card lacks, further reinforcing its broader software compatibility in the recorded tests.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 scores 9082 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD FirePro W600 scores 6223. The Intel part leads by 45.9% in this test.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The Intel P580 averages 7170, with its closest rival being the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE at 7171, a 0% delta. The AMD W600 averages 6223, with its closest rival being the AMD Radeon HD 6950 at 6210, a 0.2% delta in the W600's favor.

Q: What are the memory configurations of each GPU?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 uses System Shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The AMD FirePro W600 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports a newer version of Vulkan?

A: The Intel P580 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the AMD W600 supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Intel P580 has a 15 W TDP, while the AMD W600 has a 75 W TDP. The AMD card also lists a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: What display outputs does each GPU offer?

A: The AMD FirePro W600 provides 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The Intel P580's display outputs are motherboard dependent, meaning they vary by the host system's design.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 wins decisively in raw compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 9082 crushes the W600's 6223, a 45.9% advantage. It also offers higher FP32 throughput at 1,152.0 GFLOPS versus the W600's 768.0 GFLOPS, and it is the only one of the two with FP16 capability at 2.304 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 72.00 GTexel/s more than triples the W600's 24.00 GTexel/s, indicating strong fill-rate capabilities in texture-heavy workloads. The P580 also wins on efficiency, with a 15 W TDP versus 75 W, making it suitable for compact, low-power integrated systems. Its DirectX 12 (12_1) feature level and Vulkan 1.3 support give it a more modern API profile.

The AMD FirePro W600 wins in areas where dedicated hardware matters. Its 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth is fixed and dedicated, whereas the P580 depends entirely on system memory with system-dependent bandwidth. For workloads that require predictable, isolated memory performance, the W600 has the advantage. Its 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs make it a clear choice for multi-monitor professional setups, while the P580's outputs are motherboard dependent and not guaranteed to support such configurations. The W600 also has a higher pixel rate at 12.00 GPixel/s versus the P580's 9.000 GPixel/s, suggesting an edge in pixel-bound rendering. Its single-slot form factor and lack of power connectors make installation straightforward in workstation chassis.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The Intel P580 uses a 14 nm+ process from Intel, while the AMD W600 uses a 28 nm process from TSMC. The P580 has 576 shading units, 72 TMUs, and 9 ROPs; the W600 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Pixel rates are 9.000 GPixel/s for the Intel part and 12.00 GPixel/s for the AMD part. Texture rates are 72.00 GTexel/s and 24.00 GTexel/s respectively. FP32 throughput is 1,152.0 GFLOPS for Intel and 768.0 GFLOPS for AMD. The Intel part supports FP16 at 2.304 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio; the AMD part has no FP16 listing.

Memory differs fundamentally: the P580 uses system shared memory with no dedicated size, type, or bus width, while the W600 has 2 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The P580's memory clock is system shared, while the W600's memory runs at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective. TDP is 15 W for Intel and 75 W for AMD. The P580 is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface; the W600 is a single-slot card with PCIe 3.0 x16. The W600 has no power connectors and suggests a 250 W PSU; the P580 has no power connector data. Display outputs are motherboard dependent for Intel and 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 for AMD. The W600 has physical dimensions of 168 mm length, 111 mm height, and 20 mm width. API support differs: DirectX 12 (12_1) versus 12 (11_1), Vulkan 1.3 versus 1.2.170, with both at OpenGL 4.6.

The AMD W600 has recorded transistor data at 1,500 million on a 123 mm² die with a density of 12.2M per mm²; the Intel part has none listed. The W600's predecessor is FirePro Terascale and its successor is Radeon Pro Polaris. The Intel P580 has no predecessor or successor listed. The W600's launch MSRP was 599 USD. The Intel P580 has no launch MSRP recorded. Release dates differ: the Intel part launched on 2015-08-31, while the AMD card launched on 2012-06-12. Both are marked end-of-life. The W600's average benchmark score of 6223 places it at the 36th percentile, while the P580's average of 7170 places it at the 39th percentile.