AMD Radeon 760M vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between these two integrated graphics processors. In the two common benchmark tests available for direct comparison, the AMD Radeon 760M wins both, and the margins are substantial.

Starting with Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon 760M scores 20,255 points against the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580's 9,082 points. That is a delta of 55.2 percent in favor of the AMD part, meaning the Radeon 760M delivers more than double the raw compute throughput in this workload. For context, the Intel part's average benchmark score across all tests is 7,170, placing it at the 39th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The AMD part's average score is 6,019, which sits at the 35th percentile, an interesting inversion: despite winning the head-to-head tests decisively, the Radeon 760M's overall average is dragged down by its other benchmark results, which include some very low scores in older DirectX tests.

The Vulkan test is even more lopsided. The Radeon 760M scores 30,336 while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 manages only 5,258. That is an 82.7 percent delta, a nearly sixfold advantage for the AMD chip in this modern graphics API. This is not a narrow win; it is a generational gap in compute capability.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database, the Intel part sits within 0.7 percent of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 and within 0.5 percent of the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile, with an average score of 7,170 versus 7,171 for the GTX 560 SE. The AMD Radeon 760M, by contrast, is within 0.5 percent of the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (average score 6,049) and within 0.3 percent of the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (average score 6,001). So while the Radeon 760M wins the direct comparison here, its aggregate benchmark profile places it in the company of older discrete desktop GPUs, whereas the Intel part aligns with a slightly different tier.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras and fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 is built on the Skylake GT4e chip, using Intel's Generation 9.0 architecture, produced on a 14 nm+ process at Intel's own foundry. It belongs to the HD Graphics-W (Skylake) generation. The AMD Radeon 760M, on the other hand, uses the Phoenix chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, belongs to the Navi III IGP (Phoenix) generation, and is fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process. That process advantage is significant: 4 nm versus 14 nm+ represents a massive reduction in transistor size, which directly enables higher clock speeds and better efficiency.

The transistor counts and die sizes reflect this gap. The database records the AMD chip at 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, with a transistor density of 142.6 million per square millimeter. The Intel part has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database, but its process node alone tells the story of an older design.

Clock speeds differ sharply. The Intel part runs at a base clock of 350 MHz with a boost of 1000 MHz. The AMD part starts at 800 MHz base and boosts to 2599 MHz, more than 2.5 times the Intel boost clock. That clock advantage, combined with the newer architecture, explains much of the performance delta.

The compute units are configured differently. The Intel chip has 576 shading units, 72 texture mapping units, and 9 raster operation units. The AMD chip has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units, the AMD part achieves far higher throughput: 5.323 TFLOPS FP32 versus 1,152.0 GFLOPS for Intel. The AMD part also has 8 ray tracing cores, which the Intel part lacks entirely. Pixel rate is 41.58 GPixel/s for AMD versus 9.000 GPixel/s for Intel, and texture rate is 83.17 GTexel/s versus 72.00 GTexel/s.

Memory is system shared on both, with system-dependent bandwidth on both parts. Neither has dedicated VRAM.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench Vulkan performance?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M wins decisively with a score of 30,336 versus 5,258 for the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580, a delta of 82.7 percent in AMD's favor.

Q: Does the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 have ray tracing support?

A: No. The database lists no ray tracing cores for the Intel part. The AMD Radeon 760M has 8 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 is on Intel's 14 nm+ process, while the AMD Radeon 760M is on TSMC's 4 nm process. This is a significant generational leap in manufacturing technology.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M boosts to 2599 MHz, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 boosts to 1000 MHz. The AMD part also has a higher base clock at 800 MHz versus 350 MHz.

Q: Are both GPUs integrated graphics?

A: Yes. Both are listed with a slot width of "IGP" and use system-shared memory. Both have motherboard-dependent display outputs.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 is marked as end-of-life, while the AMD Radeon 760M is active. The Intel part was released in 2015, and the AMD part in 2024.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two parts in the database:

• Process node: Intel 14 nm+ versus TSMC 4 nm
• Transistors: Not recorded for Intel; 25,390 million for AMD
• Die size: Not recorded for Intel; 178 mm² for AMD
• Transistor density: Not recorded for Intel; 142.6M per mm² for AMD
• Base clock: 350 MHz versus 800 MHz
• Boost clock: 1000 MHz versus 2599 MHz
• Shading units: 576 versus 512
• TMUs: 72 versus 32
• ROPs: 9 versus 16
• Ray tracing cores: None versus 8
• Pixel rate: 9.000 GPixel/s versus 41.58 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 72.00 GTexel/s versus 83.17 GTexel/s
• FP32: 1,152.0 GFLOPS versus 5.323 TFLOPS
• FP16: 2.304 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 5.323 TFLOPS (1:1)
• Bus interface: Ring Bus versus PCIe 4.0 x8
• DirectX support: 12 (12_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• Vulkan support: 1.3 versus 1.4
• Power connectors: None recorded for Intel; None for AMD
• Release date: 2015-08-31 versus 2024-01-30
• Production status: End-of-life versus Active
• Predecessor: None for Intel; Navi II IGP for AMD

Both parts share a TDP of 15 W, system-shared memory type, system-dependent bandwidth, IGP slot width, motherboard-dependent display outputs, and OpenGL 4.6 support.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion for anyone choosing between these two integrated GPUs: the AMD Radeon 760M is the superior performer in every direct benchmark comparison available. It wins both head-to-head tests, with a 55.2 percent lead in OpenCL and an 82.7 percent lead in Vulkan. Its clock speeds are more than double, its FP32 throughput is over 4.5 times higher, and it brings modern features like ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate support that the Intel part simply does not have.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580, however, is not without merit in the database's context. Its average benchmark score of 7,170 is higher than the Radeon 760M's 6,019, and it sits at the 39th percentile versus the AMD part's 35th. This means that while the AMD part wins the specific tests where both were run, the Intel part holds up better across a broader set of legacy workloads. The Intel part's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 and GTX 560 SE, while the AMD part's rivals include the RX 6400 and Quadro P2000, suggesting different performance profiles across various test suites.

For modern workloads, particularly those using Vulkan or DirectX 12 Ultimate features, the Radeon 760M is the obvious pick. For older applications or scenarios where the specific benchmark mix favors the Intel part's strengths, the P580 may still serve adequately, but its end-of-life status and lack of modern API support make it a hard sell.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 760M wins in raw compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 20,255 and Vulkan score of 30,336 are both far ahead of the Intel part's 9,082 and 5,258, respectively. It wins on architecture, with a 4 nm process, RDNA 3.0 design, ray tracing cores, and DirectX 12 Ultimate support. It wins on clock speed, pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 throughput. Any workload that leverages modern APIs, compute shaders, or ray tracing will favor the AMD part heavily.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 wins only in the aggregate benchmark context. Its average score of 7,170 exceeds the AMD part's 6,019, and its percentile ranking is higher at 39 versus 35. This suggests that in a mixed set of older benchmark tests, particularly those that do not stress modern features, the Intel part can hold its own. The database also shows its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970, a well-regarded discrete GPU, which indicates the Intel part's relative strength in certain legacy scenarios.

In practical terms, the choice depends on the workload. If the application uses Vulkan, DirectX 12, or any modern compute framework, the Radeon 760M is the only rational choice. If the application is older and relies on OpenGL or DirectX 9/10/11 paths, the Intel part may produce competitive results, as its average benchmark score suggests. But for any forward-looking use case, the AMD Radeon 760M's combination of clock speed, architecture, and feature set makes it the definitive winner in this comparison.