AMD Radeon HD 6950 vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 Comparison

The AMD Radeon HD 6950 and Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 represent two fundamentally different approaches to graphics hardware: a large, power-hungry discrete card from 2010 versus a power-sipping integrated GPU from 2014. Benchmark data shows the AMD card holds a 36.3% lead in the single shared test (Geekbench OpenCL), scoring 6210 versus 4556, yet the Intel part counters with newer API support and a much lower 15 W TDP. The following analysis breaks down where each part makes sense based strictly on measured performance and architectural facts.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6950 has a slightly higher average score of 6210, versus 6117 for the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200. The Intel part’s average is pulled up by its Geekbench Metal score of 7764 and Vulkan score of 6032, which the AMD card cannot run.

Q: How do the two compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6950 wins decisively, scoring 6210 against the Intel’s 4556, a 36.3% advantage. This is the only head-to-head benchmark available in the data.

Q: What is the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200’s best benchmark result?

A: Its best score is 7764 in Geekbench Metal, which is significantly higher than its OpenCL result of 4556 and its Vulkan score of 6032. This suggests the Intel iGPU performs relatively better under Apple’s Metal API.

Q: Does the AMD card support DirectX 12?

A: No. The AMD Radeon HD 6950 supports DirectX 11.2 (11_0), while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 supports DirectX 12 (11_1). The Intel part also adds Vulkan 1.0 support, which the AMD card lacks entirely.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6950 has a TDP of 200 W and requires a 550 W suggested PSU plus two 6-pin power connectors. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has a TDP of just 15 W and uses the system’s ring bus, requiring no separate power connectors.

Q: How do their percentile rankings compare across all GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6950 sits at the 36th percentile, and the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 sits at the 35th percentile. Despite the AMD card’s large lead in OpenCL, they are nearly equivalent in overall standing.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different eras and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon HD 6950 uses the Cayman chip built on TeraScale 3 architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 40 nm process. It packs 2,640 million transistors into a 389 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 6.8M per mm². This is a massive, discrete graphics card with a dual-slot cooler, 286 mm length, and 200 W TDP. Its memory subsystem is dedicated: 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200, by contrast, is a Broadwell GT3e integrated GPU built on Intel’s Generation 8.0 architecture. It uses a 14 nm process from Intel’s own foundry, but the fact pack lists no transistor count, die size, or density. It is an IGP with no slot width, meaning it lives on the CPU die and uses the system’s ring bus for connectivity. Its memory is “System Shared,” with bandwidth listed as “System Dependent.” The clock speeds differ fundamentally: the AMD card lists only a memory clock of 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), while the Intel part has a 300 MHz base clock and an 1100 MHz boost clock.

Shader resources heavily favor the AMD card. The Radeon HD 6950 has 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster operation units (ROPs). The Intel Iris Pro has just 384 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 6 ROPs. This results in a compute throughput of 2.253 TFLOPS FP32 for AMD versus 844.8 GFLOPS for Intel. Pixel rate is 25.60 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 70.40 GTexel/s versus 52.80 GTexel/s. API support also diverges: AMD supports DirectX 11.2 and OpenGL 4.4, while Intel adds DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.0 on top of OpenGL 4.4.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon HD 6950 wins in raw compute and memory bandwidth scenarios. Its 160.0 GB/s dedicated GDDR5 bandwidth dwarfs the Intel’s system-shared memory, which is dependent on the rest of the platform. The 36.3% OpenCL victory confirms that any workload leveraging general-purpose compute on that API will favor the AMD card. Its higher pixel rate (25.60 vs 6.600 GPixel/s) and texture rate (70.40 vs 52.80 GTexel/s) suggest it can push more geometry and fill rate in older DirectX 11 titles that match its API level.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 wins in API compatibility and efficiency. It is the only one of the two with Vulkan 1.0 support, and it supports DirectX 12 (11_1) whereas the AMD card is stuck at DirectX 11.2. Its 15 W TDP means it can run in thin-and-light systems with no additional cooling or power delivery. The Intel part also shows a strong Metal result of 7764, which is 25.0% higher than the AMD card’s best OpenCL score of 6210, indicating that on macOS or Metal-based applications, the integrated GPU can outperform the older discrete card. Its 1100 MHz boost clock also suggests dynamic scaling that the AMD card, with no listed base or boost clock, does not appear to have.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The AMD Radeon HD 6950 uses a 40 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Iris Pro uses Intel’s 14 nm process. The AMD chip has 2,640 million transistors on a 389 mm² die; the Intel part has no listed transistor count or die size. Memory is 2 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth for AMD, versus System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth for Intel.

Clock speeds: AMD lists only a memory clock of 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), with no base or boost clock. Intel lists a 300 MHz base and 1100 MHz boost clock, with system-shared memory. Core counts: AMD has 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs; Intel has 384 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 6 ROPs. Rates: AMD’s pixel rate is 25.60 GPixel/s and texture rate is 70.40 GTexel/s; Intel’s are 6.600 GPixel/s and 52.80 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 2.253 TFLOPS for AMD versus 844.8 GFLOPS for Intel.

Power and physical specs differ sharply. The AMD card is a dual-slot, 286 mm long, 126 mm tall, 42 mm wide unit with a 200 W TDP, 2x 6-pin power connectors, and a 550 W suggested PSU. The Intel part is an IGP with a 15 W TDP, no power connectors, no suggested PSU, and no dimensions listed. Bus interface is PCIe 2.0 x16 for AMD versus Ring Bus for Intel. Display outputs are 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 for AMD, versus “Motherboard Dependent” for Intel. API support: AMD has DirectX 11.2 and OpenGL 4.4; Intel has DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon HD 6950 scores 6210, and the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 4556. That is a 36.3% delta in favor of the AMD card. This is a substantial margin, reflecting the AMD card’s 2.253 TFLOPS FP32 compute versus the Intel’s 844.8 GFLOPS, as well as its dedicated 160.0 GB/s memory bandwidth versus the Intel’s system-shared, dependent bandwidth.

However, the Intel part has additional benchmark results that the AMD card does not have. In Geekbench Metal, the Intel scores 7764, which is 25.0% higher than the AMD’s OpenCL score of 6210. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Intel scores 6032, which is 2.9% lower than the AMD’s OpenCL score. Since the AMD card has no Vulkan or Metal support, these results are not directly comparable, but they do show that the Intel iGPU is capable of outperforming the AMD card’s peak score in at least one API.

The nearest rivals data puts the AMD card at 36th percentile, with its closest competitor being the AMD FirePro W600 at 6223 (-0.2% delta). The Intel part sits at 35th percentile, with its closest rival being the AMD Radeon HD 8690M at 6137 (-0.3% delta). While the AMD card has a 1.5% higher average score (6210 vs 6117), the difference is within the noise of the nearest rival deltas, which range from -0.2% to -1.1% for AMD and -0.3% to 1.1% for Intel.

The Verdict

Choose the AMD Radeon HD 6950 if you need raw compute throughput in OpenCL and have the power budget for it. Its 36.3% lead over the Intel in the shared benchmark is decisive, and its dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent performance without depending on system RAM. The data shows it wins the only head-to-head test, and its higher pixel and texture rates (25.60 GPixel/s and 70.40 GTexel/s) make it the stronger choice for fill-rate-bound workloads. This is a card for a desktop system with a 550 W PSU, dual-slot clearance, and 286 mm of length available.

Choose the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 if you need API modernity, low power, or Metal performance. Its 15 W TDP is a fraction of the AMD’s 200 W, and it requires no additional power connectors or cooling. It supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.0, which the AMD card cannot, making it the only option for applications that require those APIs. Its Geekbench Metal score of 7764 exceeds the AMD card’s best score of 6210, indicating that in Metal-based workloads, the integrated GPU is the faster part. The 35th percentile ranking is nearly identical to the AMD’s 36th, so the overall performance tier is the same, but the Intel part achieves it with far less power and in a motherboard-dependent form factor.

The verdict is straightforward: the AMD card is a legacy discrete performer that wins the one test they share, while the Intel iGPU is a modern, efficient part that wins on features and specific API scenarios. Neither is a clear overall winner; the choice depends entirely on whether your workload prioritizes OpenCL compute (AMD) or API support and power efficiency (Intel).