AMD Radeon Pro 455 vs Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics compare to the AMD Radeon Pro 455 in the only shared benchmark?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics scores 14315, which is 38.5% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 455's score of 10336. This is the only head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU, and what does the percentile ranking indicate?

A: The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics has an average benchmark score of 14315 and sits in the 56th percentile of all GPUs. The AMD Radeon Pro 455 has an average benchmark score of 12831 and sits in the 52nd percentile. Intel's part ranks higher overall despite the AMD part having additional benchmark results in its favor.

Q: Which GPU has more memory, and what type of memory does each use?

A: The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics has 4 GB of LPDDR4X memory, while the AMD Radeon Pro 455 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory. Both use a 128-bit bus, but the AMD part achieves higher memory bandwidth at 81.28 GB/s compared to Intel's 68.26 GB/s.

Q: What are the process node and die size differences between the two?

A: Intel uses a 10 nm process node with a die size of 95 mm², while AMD's Radeon Pro 455 uses a 14 nm process node with a die size of 123 mm² and 3,000 million transistors. AMD's transistor density is 24.4M per mm².

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

A: Both GPUs have 768 shading units and 48 texture mapping units. However, the Intel part has 24 ROPs while the AMD part has 16 ROPs, which contributes to Intel's higher pixel rate of 39.60 GPixel/s versus AMD's 13.68 GPixel/s.

Q: What is the power consumption difference, and what form factor does each use?

A: The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics has a TDP of 25 W and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no display outputs. The AMD Radeon Pro 455 has a TDP of 35 W and is an MXM Module with portable device dependent display outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics is the clear winner in the compute-oriented OpenCL workload, posting a score of 14315 against the AMD Radeon Pro 455's 10336. That 38.5% advantage is substantial and suggests Intel's part handles general-purpose compute tasks with noticeably more headroom.

The AMD Radeon Pro 455, however, shows strength in other API workloads that were not run on the Intel part. Its Geekbench Metal score of 15916 is its highest recorded result, and its Vulkan score of 12240 also exceeds its OpenCL result. For users in Apple-centric environments where Metal is the primary API, the AMD part has demonstrated capability that the Intel part cannot match in the recorded data, since no Metal or Vulkan scores exist for Intel.

In terms of memory bandwidth, the AMD Radeon Pro 455 wins with 81.28 GB/s compared to Intel's 68.26 GB/s, despite having half the capacity. This bandwidth advantage could matter for memory-intensive workloads that fit within 2 GB. The Intel part counters with double the memory capacity, which is more forgiving for larger datasets.

The Intel part also wins decisively on pixel throughput: 39.60 GPixel/s versus 13.68 GPixel/s for AMD, a 2.9x difference. Texture rate follows the same pattern, with Intel at 79.20 GTexel/s versus AMD's 41.04 GTexel/s.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics is built on Generation 12.1 architecture, also known as Xe Graphics, using the DG1 chip. It is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The architecture supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This is a relatively modern design that emphasizes efficiency, with a 25 W TDP and an IGP form factor despite being a discrete-class part.

The AMD Radeon Pro 455 uses the Baffin chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (400 Series) generation. Its API support includes DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The GCN 4.0 architecture is older, designed for mobile workstation use in Mac systems, and consumes 35 W.

The transistor counts differ significantly: AMD packs 3,000 million transistors into its 123 mm² die, while Intel does not disclose a transistor count but fits its design into a smaller 95 mm² die. The architectural philosophies diverge: Intel's newer Xe architecture focuses on higher clock speeds and throughput per watt, while AMD's GCN 4.0 relies on a larger die and wider memory interface.

FP16 processing also reveals architectural differences. Intel delivers 5.069 TFLOPS FP16 performance using a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, while AMD delivers 1,313.3 GFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. This means Intel has dedicated or accelerated FP16 paths that AMD's GCN 4.0 lacks.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics | AMD Radeon Pro 455 |

|---|---|---|

| Process Node | 10 nm | 14 nm |

| Die Size | 95 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistors | Not disclosed | 3,000 million |

| Transistor Density | Not disclosed | 24.4M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | LPDDR4X | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 68.26 GB/s | 81.28 GB/s |

| ROPs | 24 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 39.60 GPixel/s | 13.68 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 79.20 GTexel/s | 41.04 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.534 TFLOPS | 1,313.3 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 5.069 TFLOPS (2:1) | 1,313.3 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 25 W | 35 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | MXM Module |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

The two GPUs share identical shading unit counts (768) and TMU counts (48), as well as the same 128-bit memory bus width. Both are end-of-life products with no launch MSRP recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains exactly one head-to-head comparison: Geekbench OpenCL. The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics scores 14315, while the AMD Radeon Pro 455 scores 10336. This yields a delta of 38.5% in Intel's favor, making it the single largest measured performance gap between the two.

Contextualizing the Intel score against its nearest rivals shows it is tightly clustered with other mid-range parts. The AMD Radeon Vega 11 scores 14352, just 0.3% higher, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN scores 14373, 0.4% higher. Meanwhile, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti scores 14277, which is 0.3% lower. This places the Intel part in the middle of a very narrow performance band, where a 0.5% swing separates the highest and lowest rivals.

The AMD Radeon Pro 455, by contrast, sits in a slightly lower band. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590, scores 12830, a 0% delta. The AMD FirePro W5100 scores 12847 (0.1% higher), and the AMD Radeon 740M scores 12870 (0.3% higher). The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 scores 12773, which is 0.5% lower. These deltas are all within half a percentage point, meaning the AMD part is firmly anchored to its peers.

The Intel part's OpenCL score is not just higher in absolute terms; it is also more competitive with higher-tier GPUs. The 38.5% gap over AMD in OpenCL is far larger than any delta seen among the nearest rivals for either GPU, indicating a genuine architectural advantage rather than a statistical artifact.

For the AMD part, its Metal score of 15916 is the highest in its recorded benchmark suite, surpassing its OpenCL score by over 50%. Its Vulkan score of 12240 is also higher than OpenCL. These results suggest the AMD GPU is optimized for Apple's Metal API, but since no corresponding Intel Metal or Vulkan scores exist, a direct comparison in those APIs is impossible from the recorded data.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear compute winner: the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro 455 by 38.5% in Geekbench OpenCL, the only shared benchmark. Intel also leads in pixel rate (39.60 vs 13.68 GPixel/s), texture rate (79.20 vs 41.04 GTexel/s), FP32 throughput (2.534 TFLOPS vs 1,313.3 GFLOPS), and FP16 throughput (5.069 vs 1,313.3 GFLOPS). It offers double the memory capacity at 4 GB, uses a newer 10 nm process, supports a newer DirectX feature level (12_1 vs 12_0), and consumes 10 W less power.

The AMD Radeon Pro 455 is not without merits. Its memory bandwidth is 19% higher at 81.28 GB/s, which could mitigate its smaller 2 GB frame buffer in bandwidth-sensitive tasks. Its Metal score of 15916 shows strong API-specific performance, and its Vulkan support, while at version 1.3 versus Intel's 1.4, still provides a viable alternative path. The MXM module form factor and portable device dependent display outputs indicate it was designed for integration into laptops where the Intel IGP has no display outputs at all.

For users prioritizing raw compute performance, higher resolution rendering throughput, or modern API features, the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics is the superior choice based on the recorded measurements. For those in an ecosystem where Metal is the primary API, or where the 2 GB GDDR5 memory with higher bandwidth is sufficient, the AMD Radeon Pro 455 remains a functional option, but its lower OpenCL score and older architecture place it behind Intel's part in the database's overall ranking. The 56th percentile placement for Intel versus the 52nd for AMD confirms this ordering.