AMD Radeon Pro 555X vs Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics Comparison

Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics and AMD Radeon Pro 555X are two end-of-life mobile graphics solutions that target very different use cases despite sharing a 4 GB memory pool. The Intel part, built on the DG1 chip with Generation 12.1 architecture, posts a Geekbench OpenCL score of 14315, while the AMD Radeon Pro 555X, based on the Polaris 21 chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, reaches 12628 in the same test. The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark, and Intel wins it decisively by 13.4%. However, the AMD part has a broader benchmark profile, including Metal and Vulkan results, and its average score across all tested workloads tells a different story about overall capability.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics is the clear winner in the compute-oriented OpenCL workload. Its score of 14315 places it in the 56th percentile of all GPUs, which is a solid mid-pack result. This is not a fluke; when compared to its nearest rivals, the Intel part sits within a razor-thin margin of the AMD Radeon Vega 11 (14352, only 0.3% behind) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN (14373, 0.4% behind). It even edges out the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti (14277) by 0.3%. This clustering around the 14300-14380 range indicates that the Iris Xe MAX delivers performance that is competitive with much larger discrete desktop cards from several generations ago, making it a surprisingly potent option for OpenCL-accelerated tasks.

The AMD Radeon Pro 555X, by contrast, wins on versatility and cross-platform API support. While it loses the OpenCL contest, it posts a strong Geekbench Metal score of 14479 and a respectable Geekbench Vulkan score of 12855. These results are not directly comparable to the Intel part, which only has an OpenCL benchmark listed, but they demonstrate that the AMD GPU can handle multiple graphics and compute APIs with distinct performance characteristics. Its average benchmark score across all three tests is 13321, which places it in the 54th percentile of all GPUs. The Intel part, with only one benchmark, has an identical average score of 14315 but a higher percentile rank.

For users who need OpenCL performance specifically, the Intel Iris Xe MAX is the obvious choice. For those who require Metal or Vulkan support, the AMD Radeon Pro 555X is the only option with data available. The AMD part also shows a different competitive positioning: its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480, averages 13300, which is 0.2% behind the Radeon Pro 555X's 13321 average. This suggests that while the Intel part competes with high-end desktop cards from 2017, the AMD part aligns more closely with mid-range mobile and older desktop solutions.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs take fundamentally different architectural approaches. Intel's Iris Xe MAX uses the DG1 chip built on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry, with a die size of 95 mm². It is based on the Generation 12.1 architecture and belongs to the Xe Graphics generation. The AMD Radeon Pro 555X uses the Polaris 21 chip fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process, with a larger die of 123 mm² and 3,000 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 24.4M per mm². The Intel part does not list a transistor count, but its smaller die on a more advanced node suggests a different density profile.

Memory configurations differ significantly. The Intel Iris Xe MAX uses 4 GB of LPDDR4X memory on a 128-bit bus, with a memory clock of 2133 MHz (4.3 Gbps effective) and a bandwidth of 68.26 GB/s. The AMD Radeon Pro 555X also has 4 GB, but uses GDDR5 memory on the same 128-bit bus, clocked at 1470 MHz (5.9 Gbps effective), delivering a higher bandwidth of 94.08 GB/s. This gives the AMD part a 37.8% bandwidth advantage, which could matter in memory-intensive workloads, though the benchmark data does not isolate this effect.

Compute unit configurations are identical in some respects: both have 768 shading units and 48 texture mapping units. However, the Intel part has 24 ROPs while the AMD part has 16, a 50% difference in raster output capability. Pixel fill rates reflect this: Intel achieves 39.60 GPixel/s versus AMD's 14.51 GPixel/s, a 2.7x advantage for Intel. Texture fill rate also favors Intel at 79.20 GTexel/s versus 43.54 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance shows Intel's fp32 at 2.534 TFLOPS and fp16 at 5.069 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while AMD's fp32 is 1,393.2 GFLOPS and fp16 is the same 1,393.2 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio.

Power and interface specs diverge as well. The Intel part has a TDP of 25 W and suggests a 200 W PSU, while the AMD part has a TDP of 75 W with no PSU suggestion. Both are listed as IGP slot width and have no power connectors, though AMD notes "None" explicitly. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for Intel versus PCIe 3.0 x8 for AMD. Display outputs also differ: Intel has no outputs, while AMD is "Portable Device Dependent." API support shows Intel supporting DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are unambiguous. The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics scores 14315, while the AMD Radeon Pro 555X scores 12628. This represents a 13.4% victory for Intel, which is a substantial margin across GPU compute benchmarks. To put this in context, the Intel part's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Vega 11, scores 14352, only 0.3% higher. The Intel part is therefore performing at a level that places it among much more powerful discrete GPUs, whereas the AMD part's 12628 score is closer to its own nearest rivals.

The AMD Radeon Pro 555X's OpenCL score of 12628 is notably lower than its Metal score of 14479, a difference of 14.7%. This suggests that the AMD GPU is significantly better optimized for Apple's Metal API than for the cross-platform OpenCL standard. The Vulkan score of 12855 falls between the two, sitting 8.1% above the OpenCL score but 11.2% below the Metal score. For the Intel part, only the OpenCL score exists, so there is no way to assess its Metal or Vulkan performance from the data pack.

The deltaPct values in the head-to-head benchmark confirm the margin: Intel wins with a 13.4% deltaPct over AMD. This is a clear, decisive result in the only test where both GPUs are measured on the same workload. The Intel part's win is not marginal; it is a solid double-digit percentage advantage that would be noticeable in real-world OpenCL compute tasks. However, this single benchmark does not capture the full picture, as the AMD part's Metal score of 14479 exceeds Intel's OpenCL score of 14315 by 1.1%, suggesting that AMD may be competitive or superior in Metal-optimized workloads.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics is the superior choice for OpenCL compute workloads, delivering a 13.4% advantage over the AMD Radeon Pro 555X in the only direct comparison. Its score of 14315 places it in the 56th percentile of all GPUs, ahead of the AMD part's 54th percentile. The Intel GPU also offers advantages in pixel and texture fill rates, with 39.60 GPixel/s versus 14.51 GPixel/s and 79.20 GTexel/s versus 43.54 GTexel/s, respectively. Its lower TDP of 25 W versus 75 W makes it more efficient, and its newer PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and higher Vulkan API version (1.4 versus 1.3) add to its modern feature set.

The AMD Radeon Pro 555X, however, is not without merit. Its Metal score of 14479 is the highest single benchmark result between the two GPUs, and its Vulkan score of 12855 demonstrates cross-platform capability that the Intel part cannot match based on available data. The AMD part also has higher memory bandwidth at 94.08 GB/s versus 68.26 GB/s, which could benefit certain workloads. Its average benchmark score of 13321 across three tests reflects a more balanced profile, even if its peak OpenCL performance is lower.

Users who run OpenCL-accelerated applications should choose the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics without hesitation. The 13.4% performance delta is significant, and the lower power draw makes it a better fit for thermally constrained systems. Users who need Metal or Vulkan support, particularly in macOS environments given the "Radeon Pro Mac" generation label, should look to the AMD Radeon Pro 555X, as it has proven results in those APIs. The AMD part's higher bandwidth and 1:1 fp16 ratio may also appeal to specific computational tasks that favor those characteristics.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics scores 14315 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 13.4% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 555X's score of 12628.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro 555X support Vulkan?

A: Yes, it supports Vulkan 1.3 and scores 12855 in Geekbench Vulkan, though this is not directly comparable to the Intel part, which has no Vulkan benchmark listed but supports Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 555X has a bandwidth of 94.08 GB/s using GDDR5 memory, while the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics has 68.26 GB/s using LPDDR4X memory, giving AMD a 37.8% advantage.

Q: Which GPU has better pixel fill rate?

A: The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics achieves 39.60 GPixel/s, which is 2.7 times higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 555X's 14.51 GPixel/s, due to Intel's 24 ROPs versus AMD's 16 ROPs.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in terms of power consumption?

A: The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics has a TDP of 25 W, while the AMD Radeon Pro 555X has a TDP of 75 W, making Intel three times more power-efficient on paper.

Q: Are there any benchmark results where the AMD Radeon Pro 555X outperforms the Intel part?

A: The AMD part's Geekbench Metal score of 14479 exceeds the Intel part's OpenCL score of 14315 by 1.1%, though there is no direct Metal comparison between the two in the data. The AMD part also has additional Vulkan results at 12855 that the Intel part lacks.