AMD Radeon 760M vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 Comparison

AMD Radeon 760M vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300: a matchup spanning two very different eras of integrated graphics. The data shows a decisive generational gap, but the details matter for anyone comparing legacy hardware to modern IGP solutions. The AMD Radeon 760M, built on RDNA 3.0 for the Phoenix chip, utterly dominates in raw compute, while the Intel Iris Pro P6300, a Generation 8.0 Broadwell GT3e part, occupies a much lower performance tier. This analysis breaks down exactly where the scores differ, what the architecture tells us, and which GPU fits which workload based strictly on the benchmark data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single shared benchmark result between these two GPUs is Geekbench OpenCL, and it is not a close contest. The AMD Radeon 760M scores 20,255 points, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 manages only 5,712 points. That represents a 254.6% advantage for the AMD part. In practical terms, the Radeon 760M is delivering over three and a half times the OpenCL compute throughput of the Intel chip. This is the kind of margin that separates playable frame rates from slideshow-level performance in compute-heavy workloads.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the AMD Radeon 760M's average benchmark score is 6,019, placing it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (6,001, +0.3% delta), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (6,000, +0.3%), and NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server (5,996, +0.4%). The Radeon 760M sits essentially neck-and-neck with these discrete and server-class parts, which is remarkable for an integrated processor. On the other side, the Intel Iris Pro P6300 has an average score of 5,712, sitting in the 33rd percentile, with rivals like the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX (5,721, -0.1%), GeForce GTX 550 Ti (5,731, -0.3%), and AMD Radeon HD 8790M (5,691, +0.4%). The Intel part is competitive with that older discrete GPU tier, but it is squarely in a different league than the AMD IGP.

The AMD Radeon 760M shows more benchmark depth beyond OpenCL. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 30,336; in Passmark G3D, it reaches 5,310; and in Passmark GPU Compute, it hits 2,840. For DirectX workloads, it posts Passmark DirectX 12 score of 25, DirectX 11 at 52, DirectX 9 at 65, and DirectX 10 at 19. It also has a Passmark G2D score of 890 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 400. The Intel Iris Pro P6300 has no comparable benchmark entries in the data pack, meaning the only verifiable head-to-head comparison is the OpenCL result, where it loses decisively.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M has an average benchmark score of 6,019, which is 307 points higher than the Intel Iris Pro P6300's average of 5,712. The AMD part also sits at the 35th percentile of all GPUs, two points above the Intel's 33rd percentile.

Q: How do the nearest rivals compare for each GPU?

A: The Radeon 760M's closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 6400, which scores 6,001 (a 0.3% delta), while the Quadro P2000 is slightly ahead at 6,049 (-0.5% delta). The Iris Pro P6300's nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro M500M at 5,604 (1.9% delta), with the GeForce GTX 550 Ti slightly ahead at 5,731 (-0.3% delta).

Q: Is the Intel Iris Pro P6300 still competitive in any metric?

A: The data shows no benchmark where the Intel part wins. In the only shared test, Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 5,712 versus the AMD's 20,255. Its average score is 5,712, which is close to its nearest rivals, but that is still far below the AMD part.

Q: What is the DirectX API support difference?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel Iris Pro P6300 only supports DirectX 12 (11_1). This means the AMD part can handle newer rendering features that the Intel chip cannot.

Q: How do the shading units and texture units compare?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M has 512 shading units and 32 texture mapping units, while the Intel Iris Pro P6300 has 384 shading units and 48 texture mapping units. The Intel part has more TMUs, but the AMD part has more shaders and a much higher boost clock.

Q: What are the production statuses of these GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M is listed as Active and was released on 2024-01-30, while the Intel Iris Pro P6300 is End-of-life and was released on 2014-09-04. This is a nearly ten-year gap in release dates.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two is stark. The AMD Radeon 760M is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, part of the Navi III IGP (Phoenix) generation, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It packs 25,390 million transistors into a 178 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 142.6M / mm². The Intel Iris Pro P6300, by contrast, uses the Generation 8.0 architecture, part of the HD Graphics-W (Broadwell) generation, on Intel's older 14 nm process. The Intel chip has no listed transistor count or die size, but the process node alone tells a story of lower density and higher power draw for the same performance.

The AMD part includes 8 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Intel chip, which has no RT cores listed. The Radeon 760M also supports a broader API set: Vulkan 1.4 and OpenGL 4.6, compared to the Intel's Vulkan 1.0 and OpenGL 4.4. The AMD's FP32 compute is listed at 5.323 TFLOPS, while the Intel part is at just 614.4 GFLOPS. That is an order-of-magnitude difference in raw floating-point throughput. The AMD part also supports FP16 at 5.323 TFLOPS (1:1), which is not listed for the Intel chip.

Memory architecture is shared in concept — both use System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth — but the rest of the spec sheet diverges. The AMD Radeon 760M has a pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 83.17 GTexel/s, versus the Intel's 4.800 GPixel/s and 38.40 GTexel/s. The Intel part actually has more TMUs (48 vs 32), but its lower clocks and older architecture hamper utilization.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets differ on nearly every countable metric. The AMD Radeon 760M has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2599 MHz, while the Intel Iris Pro P6300 runs at 300 MHz base and 800 MHz boost. That is a 3.2x difference in boost clock speed. Shading units: 512 vs 384. TMUs: 32 vs 48. ROPs: 16 vs 6. The AMD part has more ROPs and shaders, but fewer TMUs.

Pixel rate is 41.58 GPixel/s for AMD versus 4.800 GPixel/s for Intel. Texture rate is 83.17 GTexel/s versus 38.40 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 5.323 TFLOPS versus 614.4 GFLOPS. Both have a TDP of 15 W and are classified as IGP slot width. The AMD part uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus. Both have System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth. The AMD part has None for power connectors; the Intel part has no listing. The display outputs for both are Motherboard Dependent.

The AMD Radeon 760M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0. The AMD part is Active with a release date of 2024-01-30; the Intel part is End-of-life with a release date of 2014-09-04. Neither has a launch MSRP listed.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon 760M is the superior GPU. In the only direct comparison available, it beats the Intel Iris Pro P6300 by 254.6% in Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD part also has a higher average score (6,019 vs 5,712), a higher percentile ranking (35 vs 33), and a far more modern feature set. The Intel part is over a decade old, built on a 14nm process, and lacks ray tracing, modern API support, and competitive compute throughput.

For any modern workload — gaming, compute, or content creation — the AMD Radeon 760M is the only viable choice from this matchup. The Intel Iris Pro P6300 is an end-of-life product that struggles to match even its own contemporaries, sitting just 1.9% behind the Quadro M500M and 0.3% behind the GeForce GTX 550 Ti. The data suggests the AMD part is not just better; it is in a different performance class, rivaling modest discrete GPUs like the RX 6400 and GTX 770M.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 760M wins in every measurable category from the data pack. It wins the sole head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a 254.6% margin. It wins on raw specs: higher clocks, more shading units, more ROPs, higher pixel and texture rates, and significantly higher FP32 compute. It wins on API support, offering DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. It wins on process technology with a 4 nm node versus 14 nm. It wins on production status, being Active rather than End-of-life.

The Intel Iris Pro P6300's only advantages are structural, not performance-related. It has more texture mapping units (48 vs 32), which could theoretically help in texture-heavy workloads, but its lower clocks and older architecture negate that benefit in practice. It also uses a Ring Bus interface, which is a different design choice, but the AMD's PCIe 4.0 x8 offers far more bandwidth potential. The Intel part also has a lower base clock of 300 MHz, which might contribute to lower idle power draw, but the TDP for both is 15 W. There is no benchmark in the data pack where the Intel part wins. For anyone with a Broadwell-era system, the data shows the Iris Pro P6300 is a legacy part best replaced. For anyone building or buying new, the AMD Radeon 760M is the clear choice.