GPU Comparison

Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 and AMD Radeon 610M are both integrated graphics solutions aimed at different eras of mobile computing. The data shows a clear split: the older Intel part wins the single available compute benchmark, while the newer AMD part brings a more modern feature set and faster clock speeds. This analysis breaks down where each chip excels, what separates them architecturally, and which one makes sense for specific use cases based strictly on the benchmark and specification data provided.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results provide a single direct comparison point: Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 scores 5712, while the AMD Radeon 610M scores 4535. That gives Intel a 26% lead in this specific workload. This is the only head-to-head benchmark available, and Intel wins it outright.

However, the AMD Radeon 610M has a second benchmark result that the Intel part lacks entirely: a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6353. This indicates the AMD chip is capable of running Vulkan workloads, a modern graphics API that the Intel part supports only at version 1.0. For any application or game that leverages Vulkan, the AMD Radeon 610M is the only one of the two that can even participate meaningfully, and its score of 6353 suggests a solid level of performance in that API.

The win split is therefore narrow but distinct. Intel wins on raw OpenCL compute throughput. AMD wins on API modernity and the ability to handle Vulkan-based tasks. For legacy compute workloads or older OpenCL-optimized applications, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is the stronger choice. For anything built around Vulkan, the AMD Radeon 610M is the only viable option, and its score indicates it handles those tasks well.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two parts is generational. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is built on Intel's Generation 8.0 architecture, specifically the Broadwell GT3e chip, using a 14 nm process from Intel's own foundry. It belongs to the HD Graphics-W (Broadwell) generation and was released in September 2014. This is a mature, end-of-life design.

The AMD Radeon 610M, in contrast, is built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, using the Mendocino chip fabricated on a 6 nm process by TSMC. It belongs to the Navi II IGP (Mendocino Mobile) generation and was released in September 2022, eight years later. The process node difference is significant: 14 nm versus 6 nm. The AMD chip also has a stated die size of 100 mm², while the Intel part's die size is not provided.

The core configurations tell a compelling story. The Intel part has 384 shading units, 48 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 6 raster operation units (ROPs). The AMD part has only 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. Intel has three times the shading units and six times the TMUs. However, the AMD part has 2 dedicated ray tracing cores, which the Intel part lacks entirely. The AMD part also supports FP16 computation at a 2:1 ratio, delivering 972.8 GFLOPS, while the Intel part has no listed FP16 capability.

Clock speeds are where AMD takes a decisive lead. The Intel part runs at a base clock of 300 MHz and boosts to 800 MHz. The AMD part runs at a base clock of 1500 MHz and boosts to 1900 MHz. That is a 5x higher base clock and a 2.4x higher boost clock. This clock advantage helps explain why the AMD part, despite having far fewer shading units, manages to stay competitive in raw throughput metrics: its pixel rate is 7.600 GPixel/s versus Intel's 4.800 GPixel/s, and its FP32 output is 486.4 GFLOPS versus Intel's 614.4 GFLOPS.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score in the shared test?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 scores 5712 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 26% higher than the AMD Radeon 610M's 4535 in the same test.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon 610M support any modern features the Intel part lacks?

A: Yes. The AMD part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4, and includes 2 ray tracing cores. The Intel part only supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0, with no ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the thermal design power for both GPUs?

A: Both the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 and the AMD Radeon 610M have a TDP of 15 W.

Q: How do the clock speeds compare between the two?

A: The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 800 MHz. The AMD part has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 1900 MHz, which is significantly higher.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 has 384 shading units, while the AMD Radeon 610M has only 128 shading units.

Q: Is there a Vulkan benchmark score for the Intel part?

A: No. The Intel part only has a Geekbench OpenCL score of 5712. The AMD Radeon 610M has both a Geekbench OpenCL score of 4535 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6353.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 uses a 14 nm process from its own foundry, while the AMD Radeon 610M uses a 6 nm process from TSMC. The AMD die is 100 mm², while the Intel die size is not listed. The Intel part has 384 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 6 ROPs. The AMD part has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. The AMD part includes 2 ray tracing cores, which the Intel part does not have.

Clock speeds differ dramatically: Intel runs at 300 MHz base and 800 MHz boost, while AMD runs at 1500 MHz base and 1900 MHz boost. The AMD part has a pixel rate of 7.600 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 15.20 GTexel/s. The Intel part has a pixel rate of 4.800 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 38.40 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 614.4 GFLOPS for Intel and 486.4 GFLOPS for AMD. The AMD part also lists FP16 performance at 972.8 GFLOPS (2:1), while the Intel part has no FP16 figure.

The bus interface differs as well: Intel uses a Ring Bus, while AMD uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Power connectors are listed as "None" for AMD, while Intel has no listing. Display outputs are motherboard dependent for Intel and portable device dependent for AMD. The AMD part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0. The AMD part has a predecessor (Vega II IGP) and successor (Navi III IGP), while the Intel part has neither listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison is Geekbench OpenCL. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 scores 5712, and the AMD Radeon 610M scores 4535. The delta is 26% in favor of Intel. This is a substantial margin, and it reflects the Intel part's higher shading unit count and TMU count despite its much lower clock speeds. The Intel part's 384 shading units and 48 TMUs deliver more raw compute throughput in OpenCL than the AMD part's 128 shading units and 8 TMUs can muster, even with the AMD part's 5x higher base clock.

However, the AMD part's Vulkan score of 6353 provides context. Since the Intel part has no Vulkan score, it is impossible to compare them directly in that API. But the AMD part's Vulkan score is notably higher than its own OpenCL score of 4535, indicating that the architecture is better suited to Vulkan workloads. This suggests that in modern applications leveraging Vulkan, the AMD part would likely outperform the Intel part, which lacks Vulkan support beyond version 1.0.

The Intel part's 26% OpenCL win is its only victory, and it is a decisive one. The AMD part's Vulkan capability is its counterargument, and its score of 6353 is strong enough to suggest it would be competitive in Vulkan-based games and applications where the Intel part cannot even run.

The Verdict

The choice between these two GPUs depends entirely on the workload. For pure OpenCL compute performance, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is the clear winner. Its score of 5712 is 26% ahead of the AMD Radeon 610M, and it sits at the 33rd percentile of all GPUs, compared to the AMD part's 32nd percentile. The Intel part also has a texture rate of 38.40 GTexel/s, which is more than double the AMD part's 15.20 GTexel/s, making it better suited for texture-heavy workloads.

For modern gaming and applications that use Vulkan, the AMD Radeon 610M is the only option. Its Vulkan score of 6353 demonstrates it can handle these workloads, and its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 means it can run contemporary software that the Intel part simply cannot. The AMD part also has 2 ray tracing cores, a feature absent from the Intel part entirely.

The AMD part's higher clock speeds (1500 MHz base, 1900 MHz boost) and 6 nm process node indicate a more efficient design, but the benchmark data shows it loses in OpenCL. The Intel part's older 14 nm process and lower clocks are compensated by its massive shading unit advantage. Users with legacy OpenCL-based software should choose Intel. Users with modern Vulkan-based games or applications should choose AMD. The data does not support a single winner across all use cases; it supports two different winners for two different jobs.