AMD Radeon 820M vs Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the two integrated graphics processors being compared here?

A: The comparison is between the AMD Radeon 820M, built on RDNA 3.5 architecture using a 4 nm process, and the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile, built on Generation 12.2 architecture using a 10 nm process.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M has a boost clock of 2800 MHz, while the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile has a boost clock of 1450 MHz.

Q: How do the shading unit counts differ between the two?

A: The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile has 640 shading units, whereas the AMD Radeon 820M has 128 shading units.

Q: What is the difference in their DirectX support?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: Which processor has a higher pixel rate?

A: The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile has a pixel rate of 29.00 GPixel/s, compared to the AMD Radeon 820M's 11.20 GPixel/s.

Q: When were these processors released?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M was released on 2025-02-28, while the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile was released on 2023-01-03.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 820M is built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It belongs to the Navi III IGP generation, specifically the Strix Point Mobile lineup, and uses the Krackan Point 2 chip. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile, by contrast, uses the Generation 12.2 architecture, fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel, and is part of the HD Graphics-M generation based on the Raptor Lake chip.

The compute configuration differs substantially. The AMD part has 128 shading units, 8 texture mapping units, and 4 render output units. The Intel part has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 render output units. This gives Intel a 5x advantage in shading units, TMUs, and ROPs. However, the AMD Radeon 820M includes 2 ray tracing cores, which the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile lacks entirely.

Clock behavior also separates the two. The AMD processor has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2800 MHz. The Intel processor has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1450 MHz. Despite Intel's larger execution resource pool, its lower boost clock reduces the theoretical throughput advantage.

The memory subsystem is identical in structure: both use system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth and a system shared bus width. Neither has dedicated video memory. Both are integrated graphics processors with portable device dependent display outputs.

The AMD Radeon 820M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX feature level difference is notable: AMD reaches the 12_2 feature set, which includes hardware ray tracing support. Intel is limited to 12_1.

The bus interface also differs. AMD uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while Intel uses a Ring Bus architecture. Both are rated at 15 W TDP, and both are IGPs with no additional power connectors.

The Intel part has a successor, the Arc Graphics-M, while the AMD part has no successor listed. The AMD part has a predecessor, the Navi II IGP, while the Intel part has no predecessor listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two processors. The database lists zero benchmark entries for both the AMD Radeon 820M and the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile, and the head-to-head benchmark array is empty. As a result, the wins counter shows zero for both sides.

The theoretical specifications, however, provide a basis for projection. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile delivers 1.856 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 2.59x the AMD Radeon 820M's 716.8 GFLOPS. In FP16, Intel reaches 3.712 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while AMD delivers 716.8 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The FP16 gap is even larger at roughly 5.18x.

Pixel throughput follows a similar pattern. Intel's 29.00 GPixel/s is 2.59x the AMD part's 11.20 GPixel/s. Texture rate shows Intel at 58.00 GTexel/s versus AMD at 22.40 GTexel/s, a 2.59x difference. These ratios align closely because the clock and resource counts scale together for Intel.

The AMD Radeon 820M compensates with a much higher boost clock. At 2800 MHz, it runs 1.93x faster than Intel's 1450 MHz boost. This partially offsets Intel's 5x resource advantage, but the math still favors Intel on raw throughput. The FP32 calculation confirms this: Intel's 640 shading units at 1450 MHz produces more work per cycle than AMD's 128 shading units at 2800 MHz.

Ray tracing is the one area where AMD has a hardware feature that Intel cannot match. The 2 ray tracing cores in the AMD Radeon 820M enable DirectX 12 Ultimate features that the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile does not support. This does not appear in the theoretical throughput numbers, but it represents a capability difference for applications that use DirectX 12_2 features.

Both processors share the same 15 W TDP and system shared memory design. This means the practical performance in a laptop depends heavily on the host system's memory configuration, which the database records as system dependent for both.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile holds a clear theoretical throughput advantage over the AMD Radeon 820M. The FP32 rate of 1.856 TFLOPS versus 716.8 GFLOPS, the pixel rate of 29.00 GPixel/s versus 11.20 GPixel/s, and the texture rate of 58.00 GTexel/s versus 22.40 GTexel/s all point to Intel delivering roughly 2.6x the raw compute output. For applications that depend on shader throughput, pixel fill, or texture sampling, the Intel processor appears better suited.

The AMD Radeon 820M counters with architectural modernity. Its RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm process represents a newer design generation than Intel's Generation 12.2 on 10 nm. The 2 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support give it a feature set that the Intel part lacks. For software that uses ray tracing or requires DirectX 12_2, the AMD processor is the only one of the two that can comply.

The release dates also matter. AMD's part arrived on 2025-02-28, over two years after Intel's 2023-01-03 launch. The newer process node and architecture suggest the AMD part benefits from more recent design improvements, even if its raw resource count is lower.

The database records no benchmark scores for either processor, and both sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs. With no measured results, the verdict relies entirely on specification analysis. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile appears to be the stronger choice for conventional graphics workloads. The AMD Radeon 820M appears to be the stronger choice for ray tracing and modern API feature support.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across every major compute specification. The AMD Radeon 820M uses RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile uses Generation 12.2 architecture on a 10 nm process from Intel. The AMD chip is Krackan Point 2, while the Intel chip is Raptor Lake.

Shading units: AMD has 128, Intel has 640. Texture mapping units: AMD has 8, Intel has 40. Render output units: AMD has 4, Intel has 20. Ray tracing cores: AMD has 2, Intel has none.

Base clock: AMD runs at 400 MHz, Intel at 300 MHz. Boost clock: AMD runs at 2800 MHz, Intel at 1450 MHz.

Pixel rate: AMD delivers 11.20 GPixel/s, Intel delivers 29.00 GPixel/s. Texture rate: AMD delivers 22.40 GTexel/s, Intel delivers 58.00 GTexel/s. FP32: AMD delivers 716.8 GFLOPS, Intel delivers 1.856 TFLOPS. FP16: AMD delivers 716.8 GFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, Intel delivers 3.712 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio.

Bus interface: AMD uses PCIe 4.0 x8, Intel uses Ring Bus. DirectX support: AMD reaches 12 Ultimate (12_2), Intel reaches 12 (12_1). OpenGL and Vulkan support are identical at 4.6 and 1.4 respectively.

Release date: AMD arrived on 2025-02-28, Intel on 2023-01-03. Predecessor: AMD lists Navi II IGP, Intel lists none. Successor: AMD lists none, Intel lists Arc Graphics-M.

Identical specifications include 15 W TDP, IGP slot width, no power connectors, system shared memory size, type, and bus width, system dependent bandwidth, portable device dependent display outputs, and active production status.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile wins on raw computational throughput. Its 1.856 TFLOPS FP32 rate more than doubles the AMD part's 716.8 GFLOPS. The 29.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 58.00 GTexel/s texture rate give it a 2.59x advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios. For games and applications that stress traditional rasterization, pixel shading, or texture filtering, the Intel processor has the stronger specification sheet.

The AMD Radeon 820M wins on architectural features. Its RDNA 3.5 architecture and 4 nm process node represent a newer manufacturing generation than Intel's 10 nm Generation 12.2. The 2 ray tracing cores enable DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support, which the Intel part cannot offer with its DirectX 12 (12_1) limit. Software that requires hardware ray tracing or the 12_2 feature set will only run properly on the AMD processor.

The AMD part also wins on clock speed headroom. Its 2800 MHz boost clock is nearly double Intel's 1450 MHz. While this does not overcome Intel's resource advantage in the recorded specifications, it does indicate the AMD design can scale its smaller execution units at a much higher frequency.

The Intel part wins on resource count and FP16 throughput. The 640 shading units versus 128, the 40 TMUs versus 8, and the 20 ROPs versus 4 all favor Intel. The FP16 rate of 3.712 TFLOPS, achieved with a 2:1 ratio, gives Intel a substantial edge in workloads that use half-precision arithmetic.

The database shows no measured wins for either side, as both benchmark arrays are empty and the wins counters are zero. The use-case split therefore follows the specification differences. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile suits throughput-oriented graphics workloads. The AMD Radeon 820M suits feature-oriented workloads that require modern API capabilities and ray tracing support.