AMD Radeon R5 M240 vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the database's OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6975 points in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 4556 points. That puts the AMD part 53.1% ahead of the Intel integrated solution in this specific test.

Q: How do these two compare in overall GPU percentile ranking?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M240 sits at the 39th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 sits at the 35th percentile. The AMD part ranks higher overall, though both are near the lower-mid range of the recorded GPU landscape.

Q: What is the closest rival to each GPU according to the database?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M240's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M, which scores 6946 points, a 0.4% difference. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200's closest rival is the AMD Radeon HD 8690M, which scores 6137 points, a 0.3% difference.

Q: Does the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 have any benchmark wins over the AMD part?

A: In the head-to-head OpenCL test, the Intel part loses. However, the Intel GPU has additional recorded benchmark scores in Metal (7764) and Vulkan (6032) tests, while the AMD GPU only has an OpenCL score recorded. The database shows Intel winning 0 head-to-head comparisons and AMD winning 1.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between these two?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M240 has 1024 MB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 uses System Shared memory, with the bus width and bandwidth listed as System Shared and System Dependent respectively.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has 384 shading units, compared to 320 on the AMD Radeon R5 M240. Intel also has more texture mapping units (48 vs 20), though AMD has more raster operation units (8 vs 6).

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R5 M240 is built on GCN 1.0 architecture using a chip codenamed Jet. It belongs to the Gem System generation under the R5 M200 series. The GPU is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 690 million transistors packed into a 56 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. This is a discrete mobile graphics solution that connects via PCIe 3.0 x8.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is a fundamentally different design. It uses Intel's Generation 8.0 architecture on the Broadwell GT3e chip, part of the HD Graphics family within the Broadwell generation. It is manufactured on Intel's 14 nm process. The database does not list transistor count, die size, or transistor density for this part, which reflects its nature as an integrated GPU. It connects through the Ring Bus and is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor). Its display outputs are motherboard dependent, meaning the GPU relies entirely on the host platform for connectivity.

The memory architecture differs sharply. AMD uses dedicated 1024 MB of DDR3 with a 64-bit bus and 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. Intel shares system memory dynamically, with the type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. This is a critical architectural distinction: the AMD part does not compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth, while the Intel part does.

In terms of compute resources, the Intel GPU has more shading units (384 vs 320) and significantly more texture mapping units (48 vs 20). AMD counters with more ROPs (8 vs 6). The clock behavior also differs. The AMD GPU runs at a 1000 MHz base and 1030 MHz boost. The Intel GPU runs at a 300 MHz base but boosts to 1100 MHz, a much wider dynamic range.

API support shows some differences. Both support DirectX 12 (11_1) and OpenGL, but AMD supports OpenGL 4.6 while Intel supports OpenGL 4.4. AMD supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while Intel supports Vulkan 1.0. This means the AMD part has a more modern API feature set, particularly for Vulkan titles.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records one head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6975 points, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 4556 points. The delta is 53.1% in favor of AMD. This is not a marginal victory; it is a commanding lead in raw OpenCL compute performance.

To contextualize that 6975 score, the AMD part's nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M at 6946 points (0.4% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M at 7023 points (0.7% faster), the NVIDIA T600 at 7035 points (0.8% faster), and the AMD FirePro M5100 at 6830 points (2.1% slower). The R5 M240 effectively trades blows with GTX 675M and sits within a small window of GTX 680M and T600. In other words, despite its low-end positioning, its OpenCL score places it alongside significantly higher-tier discrete mobile GPUs.

The Intel part's 4556 OpenCL score places it near a different set of rivals. The AMD Radeon HD 8690M scores 6137 points (0.3% faster than Intel), the NVIDIA RTX A400 scores 6078 points (0.6% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 scores 6077 points (0.7% faster), and the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 6049 points (1.1% faster). Notably, the Intel GPU's rivals all cluster in the 6049 to 6137 range, which means its OpenCL score sits well below the pack. The 53.1% gap between the two GPUs in this test is far larger than the gaps between either GPU and its own rivals.

The Intel part does have additional benchmark scores that the AMD part lacks: a Geekbench Metal score of 7764 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6032. These are not head-to-head comparisons because the AMD R5 M240 has no recorded Metal or Vulkan scores in the database. However, the Vulkan score of 6032 is interesting because it is substantially higher than the Intel part's OpenCL score of 4556. This suggests that on the Intel GPU, the choice of API matters greatly, with Vulkan delivering roughly 32% more performance than OpenCL.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The process node is 28 nm for AMD versus 14 nm for Intel. AMD is fabricated by TSMC, Intel by its own foundry. AMD has 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die; Intel's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

Clock speeds differ significantly. AMD runs at 1000 MHz base and 1030 MHz boost. Intel runs at 300 MHz base and 1100 MHz boost. The memory clock is 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) for AMD, while Intel's memory clock is listed as System Shared.

Memory configuration is one of the largest divides. AMD has 1024 MB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. Intel has System Shared memory with System Shared type, System Shared bus width, and System Dependent bandwidth. This means the AMD GPU has fixed, dedicated resources, while the Intel GPU's memory performance depends entirely on the host system.

Compute unit counts differ: AMD has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Intel has 384 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 6 ROPs. Pixel rate is 8.240 GPixel/s for AMD versus 6.600 GPixel/s for Intel. Texture rate is 20.60 GTexel/s for AMD versus 52.80 GTexel/s for Intel. FP32 compute is 659.2 GFLOPS for AMD versus 844.8 GFLOPS for Intel. So Intel leads in shading units, TMUs, texture rate, and FP32, while AMD leads in ROPs and pixel rate.

The TDP is listed only for Intel at 15 W; AMD's TDP is not recorded. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x8 for AMD and Ring Bus for Intel. Display outputs are not listed for AMD and are motherboard dependent for Intel. API support differs: AMD supports OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170, while Intel supports OpenGL 4.4 and Vulkan 1.0. Both support DirectX 12 (11_1). Neither GPU has a recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M240 wins the OpenCL compute comparison decisively. Its 6975 score is 53.1% higher than the Intel part's 4556 score. This makes it the better choice for any workload that relies on OpenCL acceleration, whether that is OpenCL-based rendering, physics simulation, or compute tasks in productivity applications. The AMD part also has the advantage of dedicated VRAM, which means it does not consume system memory bandwidth that the CPU needs. Its 8 ROPs and higher pixel rate (8.240 GPixel/s vs 6.600 GPixel/s) give it an edge in fill-rate-bound scenarios.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 wins in raw FP32 throughput. Its 844.8 GFLOPS exceeds the AMD part's 659.2 GFLOPS. It also has more texture mapping units (48 vs 20) and a much higher texture rate (52.80 GTexel/s vs 20.60 GTexel/s). For texture-heavy workloads that are not bottlenecked by memory bandwidth, the Intel part has a theoretical advantage. The Intel GPU also has a lower TDP at 15 W, which matters in thin-and-light systems where thermal headroom is limited. Its base clock of 300 MHz is low, but the 1100 MHz boost shows that it can scale up when power and thermals allow.

The Intel part also has recorded Vulkan and Metal scores: 6032 and 7764 respectively. These are not compared head-to-head with AMD, but they indicate that the Intel GPU can deliver much higher performance in Vulkan workloads than in OpenCL. If a user's application uses Vulkan, the Intel GPU's effective performance may be closer to its rivals than the OpenCL score suggests.

The Verdict

The data makes a clear case for the AMD Radeon R5 M240 in OpenCL-based workloads. Its 53.1% lead over the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is substantial, and its score of 6975 places it alongside the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M and GTX 680M, both of which are discrete mobile GPUs with much higher market positioning. For anyone running OpenCL compute tasks, the AMD part is the stronger choice.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is not without merit. Its 844.8 GFLOPS FP32 throughput and 52.80 GTexel/s texture rate exceed the AMD part's corresponding figures. Its 15 W TDP makes it suitable for power-constrained systems. And its Vulkan score of 6032 suggests that API selection can significantly change its performance profile. However, in the only direct head-to-head benchmark recorded, it loses by a wide margin.

The choice comes down to workload and platform. If the system already has an Intel Broadwell CPU with Iris Pro Graphics 6200, the integrated GPU may be sufficient for light OpenCL tasks, especially if power consumption is a concern. If the user needs dedicated memory and stronger OpenCL compute performance, the AMD Radeon R5 M240 is the better pick. The AMD part's 39th percentile ranking versus Intel's 35th also reflects its higher overall standing in the database, even if both are near the lower-mid range of recorded GPUs. For compute-focused users, the AMD Radeon R5 M240 is the safer recommendation based on the recorded data.