AMD Radeon 680M vs Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics Comparison

The AMD Radeon 680M and Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics occupy a fascinating space in the mobile graphics landscape. The data places the 680M in the 57th percentile of all GPUs, while the Iris Xe MAX sits just one point lower at the 56th percentile. Despite this near-identical overall standing, the benchmark results reveal a decisive performance gap. The 680M’s average benchmark score of 15270 dwarfs the Intel part’s 14315, a difference that becomes stark when comparing their nearest rivals. The 680M trades blows with discrete GPUs like the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 and RTX 3050 OEM, while the Iris Xe MAX is bracketed by integrated Vega 11 graphics and the much older NVIDIA GTX TITAN. This sets the stage for a comparison where the AMD part is the clear aggressor, but the Intel chip has its own distinct profile worth examining.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and it is not a close contest. The AMD Radeon 680M scores 23468, while the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics manages 14315. This yields a delta of 63.9% in favor of the AMD part. To put that in perspective, the 680M is not merely faster; it is performing at a level that places it in the company of dedicated discrete graphics cards. Its average score of 15270 puts it within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 and RTX 2060, and it actually edges out the RTX 3050 OEM by 0.5% and the AMD RX 7600 by 0.7%. The Intel Iris Xe MAX, by contrast, with its average score of 14315, sits 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon Vega 11 and 0.4% behind the NVIDIA GTX TITAN.

The delta of 63.9% in OpenCL is the single largest data point in this comparison. It means that in compute workloads leveraging OpenCL, the AMD part delivers roughly two-thirds more performance than the Intel part. This is not a marginal victory; it is a generational gap in execution. While the Intel chip’s 14315 score is respectable for an integrated solution, the AMD 680M’s 23468 score is approaching the territory of entry-level discrete GPUs from several generations back. The win count is 1 for the AMD 680M and 0 for the Intel Iris Xe MAX, and the data suggests that this pattern would likely repeat across other compute-heavy benchmarks if they were available.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is fundamental. The AMD Radeon 680M is built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It is part of the Navi II IGP generation, specifically the Rembrandt Mobile chip. The Intel Iris Xe MAX uses Generation 12.1 architecture, known as Xe Graphics, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The process node difference is significant: 6 nm versus 10 nm typically translates to better power efficiency and higher transistor density for the AMD part. The 680M packs 13,100 million transistors into a 208 mm² die, yielding a density of 63.0 million transistors per mm². The Intel chip has a much smaller 95 mm² die, but its transistor count and density are not listed in the data, making a direct comparison impossible.

Clock speeds tell a story of aggressive power delivery versus conservative efficiency. The 680M has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost of 2200 MHz. The Iris Xe MAX starts at a lowly 300 MHz base but boosts to 1650 MHz. The AMD part’s higher clocks contribute directly to its compute advantage. Both parts have 768 shading units and 48 texture mapping units, but the ROP count differs: 32 on the 680M versus 24 on the Intel chip. This difference in ROPs explains part of the pixel throughput gap. The 680M achieves 70.40 GPixel/s and 105.6 GTexel/s, while the Iris Xe MAX manages 39.60 GPixel/s and 79.20 GTexel/s. The AMD part also features 12 ray tracing cores, a capability entirely absent from the Intel chip.

Memory architecture is another point of divergence. The 680M uses system-shared memory, with bandwidth described as “System Dependent.” The Intel part has dedicated 4 GB of LPDDR4X memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a fixed 68.26 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a crucial distinction: the Intel chip has its own dedicated VRAM, which can be advantageous in certain scenarios, but the AMD part’s performance suggests its system-shared approach is not a bottleneck in the available benchmarks. The Intel chip’s memory runs at 2133 MHz with 4.3 Gbps effective speed.

The Verdict

From the data, the AMD Radeon 680M is the superior performer. Its 63.9% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is overwhelming, and its average benchmark score of 15270 places it in a different class than the Intel Iris Xe MAX’s 14315. The 680M’s nearest rivals include the RTX 2060 and GTX 580, while the Intel part’s rivals are Vega 11 and GTX TITAN. If raw compute performance is the priority, the choice is unambiguous: the AMD part wins by a wide margin. The 680M also benefits from a more modern 6 nm process, higher clock speeds, and ray tracing support, all of which point to better future-proofing.

However, the Intel Iris Xe MAX is not without merit. It is a 25 W part compared to the 680M’s 50 W TDP, meaning it draws half the power. In a system where thermal headroom and battery life are paramount, that efficiency could be decisive. The Intel chip also has dedicated 4 GB of VRAM, which may reduce contention with the CPU for memory bandwidth in some workloads. But the data shows that, despite these advantages, it simply cannot match the AMD part’s compute throughput. The Intel chip is also end-of-life, while the 680M remains active in production. For anyone building a system today, the AMD Radeon 680M is the clear recommendation based strictly on performance metrics.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification. The AMD Radeon 680M is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Iris Xe MAX uses a 10 nm process at Intel. The 680M has a die size of 208 mm² with 13,100 million transistors; the Intel chip has a 95 mm² die with no transistor count listed. Clock speeds diverge sharply: the 680M runs at 2000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, versus the Intel part’s 300 MHz base and 1650 MHz boost. Memory configurations are fundamentally different: the 680M uses system-shared memory, while the Iris Xe MAX has 4 GB of LPDDR4X on a 128-bit bus with 68.26 GB/s bandwidth.

The ROP count favors AMD at 32 versus Intel’s 24, though both have 768 shading units and 48 TMUs. Pixel rate is 70.40 GPixel/s for AMD versus 39.60 GPixel/s for Intel, and texture rate is 105.6 GTexel/s versus 79.20 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput is 3.379 TFLOPS for the 680M and 2.534 TFLOPS for the Intel part. The AMD part includes 12 ray tracing cores; the Intel chip has none. The TDP is 50 W for AMD and 25 W for Intel. The 680M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel chip is capped at DirectX 12 (12_1). Both use PCIe 4.0 x8, but the Intel part has no display outputs, while the AMD part’s outputs are portable-device dependent. The AMD part was released in January 2023, the Intel part in October 2020.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M has an average benchmark score of 15270, while the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics scores 14315.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M scores 23468, which is 63.9% higher than the Intel Iris Xe MAX’s 14315.

Q: Does the Intel Iris Xe MAX have dedicated memory?

A: Yes, it has 4 GB of LPDDR4X memory on a 128-bit bus with 68.26 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the AMD 680M uses system-shared memory.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M has 12 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Intel Iris Xe MAX has no ray tracing cores and is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: What are the power consumption figures for each?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M has a TDP of 50 W, while the Intel Iris Xe MAX has a TDP of 25 W.

Q: Which GPU is still in active production?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M is listed as Active, while the Intel Iris Xe MAX is End-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 680M wins decisively in raw compute performance. Its 63.9% lead in OpenCL and its average score of 15270, which rivals discrete GPUs like the RTX 2060, make it the obvious choice for any workload that stresses the GPU. It also wins on features, with ray tracing support, a more recent 6 nm process, higher clock speeds, and a higher pixel and texture rate. The 680M’s nearest rivals being the RTX 2060 and GTX 580 indicate it can handle demanding gaming and creative workloads at playable settings, at least at lower resolutions.

The Intel Iris Xe MAX wins on power efficiency. Its 25 W TDP is half that of the AMD part’s 50 W, making it the better fit for ultra-thin laptops or systems where thermal limits are strict. It also has the advantage of dedicated VRAM, which could reduce system memory pressure. However, its performance ceiling is lower; its nearest rivals are Vega 11 integrated graphics and the GTX TITAN, which are older or less capable parts. The Intel chip also has a higher suggested PSU of 200 W, though this is a system-level consideration. For a user who prioritizes battery life and low heat over raw frame rates, the Intel part has a niche, but the data overwhelmingly favors the AMD Radeon 680M for anyone seeking maximum graphics performance.