AMD Radeon HD 7730M vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 Comparison

The AMD Radeon HD 7730M and the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 represent two very different approaches to mobile graphics, separated by two years of silicon evolution. The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark, where the AMD part takes a decisive victory, yet the Intel solution counters with a broader API feature set and significantly lower power consumption. This comparison hinges on what the benchmark results actually measure versus what the hardware specifications suggest for real-world workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is in Geekbench OpenCL, and it is a landslide. The AMD Radeon HD 7730M scores 6,581 points, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 manages just 4,556 points. That translates to a 44.4% advantage for the AMD chip, a massive gap that underscores the fundamental difference in their design targets. The AMD part is a discrete mobile GPU, while the Intel solution is an integrated processor graphics unit, and the raw compute numbers reflect that hierarchy.

Looking at the AMD side, its score of 6,581 places it in the 38th percentile of all GPUs, which is respectable for a mobile part from its era. Its nearest rivals in the database are remarkably close: the Intel UHD Graphics P750 scores 6,554 (a mere 0.4% behind), the AMD Radeon R7 M460 scores 6,612 (0.5% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M scores 6,513 (1% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M scores 6,493 (1.4% behind). This cluster of results indicates that the HD 7730M sits right in the middle of a competitive pack of mid-range mobile graphics solutions, with none of these rivals holding a significant edge.

The Intel Iris Pro 6200’s OpenCL score of 4,556 is substantially lower, and its aggregate benchmark picture tells a more complex story. It has a Geekbench Metal score of 7,764 and a Vulkan score of 6,032, which are notably higher than its OpenCL result. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 6,117, which puts it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 8690M at 6,137 (0.3% ahead), the NVIDIA RTX A400 at 6,078 (0.6% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 at 6,077 (0.7% behind), and the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 at 6,049 (1.1% behind). The Intel part’s average score is therefore competitive with these older and entry-level discrete GPUs, even though its single OpenCL result lags the AMD HD 7730M by a wide margin.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon HD 7730M wins decisively in the OpenCL compute test, and that is its primary area of strength. With 512 shading units compared to the Intel’s 384, and a dedicated 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus providing 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth, the AMD chip is built for sustained parallel workloads. Its pixel rate of 10.80 GPixel/s and texture rate of 21.60 GTexel/s are solid numbers for a 25 W part, and the 691.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance gives it a clear theoretical advantage in raw math. This makes it the obvious choice for any application that relies heavily on OpenCL acceleration, such as certain video encoding tools or scientific compute tasks.

The Intel Iris Pro 6200 wins in the broader compatibility and efficiency categories. It supports Vulkan 1.0, whereas the AMD chip only supports Vulkan 1.2.170 — however, the AMD part supports OpenGL 4.6 while the Intel part is limited to OpenGL 4.4. Both support DirectX 12 (11_1), so that is a tie. The Intel part’s TDP is 15 W versus the AMD’s 25 W, making it significantly more power-efficient. Its boost clock of 1,100 MHz is nearly double the AMD’s 675 MHz boost, which explains why its texture rate of 52.80 GTexel/s is far higher than the AMD’s 21.60 GTexel/s, despite having fewer shading units. The Intel chip also leverages system shared memory, which can be faster or slower depending on the system configuration, but eliminates the need for a separate VRAM pool. For a thin-and-light laptop, the Intel solution’s lower power draw and integrated nature are clear advantages.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two parts is substantial. The AMD Radeon HD 7730M is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It uses the Chelsea chip, part of the London generation (HD 7700M series), and packs 1,500 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. It connects via PCIe 2.0 x16 and has a dedicated 2 GB of DDR3 memory. The AMD part was released on April 23, 2012, and its predecessor was Vancouver, with a successor named Solar System. It is now end-of-life.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is a fundamentally different beast. It is based on the Generation 8.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at Intel’s own fabs. It uses the Broadwell GT3e chip, part of the HD Graphics (Broadwell) generation. Intel does not list transistor count or die size for this part, and it connects via a Ring Bus rather than a PCIe interface. Its memory is system shared, meaning it has no dedicated VRAM and instead relies on the main system RAM, with bandwidth described as system dependent. It was released on September 4, 2014, and has no listed predecessor or successor. It is also end-of-life and has a slot width of IGP, indicating it is an integrated graphics processor rather than a discrete card.

The compute configurations differ significantly. The AMD chip has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Intel chip has 384 shading units, 48 TMUs, but only 6 ROPs. This explains the divergent performance characteristics: the AMD part has more shading units and ROPs for pixel-heavy work, while the Intel part has more TMUs for texture-heavy work. The AMD’s FP32 output is 691.2 GFLOPS, while the Intel’s is 844.8 GFLOPS, meaning the Intel chip actually has higher theoretical FP32 throughput despite fewer shading units, thanks to its much higher clock speeds. The clock difference is stark: the AMD runs at a base of 575 MHz and boost of 675 MHz, while the Intel runs at a base of 300 MHz and boost of 1,100 MHz.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher raw compute score in OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 7730M scores 6,581 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 44.4% higher than the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200’s score of 4,556.

Q: Does the Intel Iris Pro 6200 support more modern graphics APIs than the AMD Radeon HD 7730M?

A: The Intel part supports Vulkan 1.0, while the AMD part supports Vulkan 1.2.170. However, the AMD part supports OpenGL 4.6, while the Intel part only supports OpenGL 4.4. Both support DirectX 12 (11_1).

Q: What is the power consumption difference between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 7730M has a TDP of 25 W, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has a TDP of 15 W, making the Intel part more power-efficient.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon HD 7730M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: Its score of 6,581 is within 1.4% of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M (6,493) and within 0.5% of the AMD Radeon R7 M460 (6,612), showing it is closely matched with those parts.

Q: How does the Intel Iris Pro 6200’s average score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: Its average score of 6,117 is 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon HD 8690M (6,137) and 0.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (6,077), indicating it is competitive in that range.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 7730M has a pixel rate of 10.80 GPixel/s, which is substantially higher than the Intel Iris Pro 6200’s 6.600 GPixel/s.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for different use cases. The AMD Radeon HD 7730M is the superior choice for pure OpenCL compute performance, delivering a 44.4% higher score than the Intel Iris Pro 6200 in the direct head-to-head test. Its dedicated memory and higher pixel rate make it better suited for gaming and graphics-intensive tasks that require consistent frame buffer performance. If the primary workload is OpenCL-accelerated applications or older DirectX 11-era games, the AMD part is the one to pick.

The Intel Iris Pro 6200, despite losing the OpenCL benchmark, offers a more balanced package for modern thin-and-light laptops. Its 15 W TDP is 40% lower than the AMD part, and its higher boost clock and texture rate make it competitive for texture-bound workloads. Its Vulkan support, though an older version, and its system shared memory architecture make it more flexible for heterogeneous systems. The Intel part’s average benchmark score of 6,117 across Metal, Vulkan, and OpenCL tests is respectable, and its higher FP32 throughput of 844.8 GFLOPS suggests it can punch above its weight in certain compute scenarios.

For users who need maximum raw OpenCL performance in a discrete GPU form factor, the AMD Radeon HD 7730M is the clear winner. For users who prioritize power efficiency, integrated simplicity, and a more modern feature set in a laptop, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is the better fit. The benchmark results do not lie: one part dominates a single test, but the other offers broader system-level advantages.