AMD Radeon R5 M330 vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 Comparison

Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 and AMD Radeon R5 M330 are both end-of-life integrated-class GPUs from different generations, targeting thin-and-light laptops. Benchmark results show a split decision: one workload clearly favors Intel, while the other swings to AMD. The data indicates these are closely matched parts overall, but their architectural philosophies diverge significantly.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two available benchmark comparisons paint a contrasting picture. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 scores 5042, while the AMD Radeon R5 M330 scores 4302. This gives Intel a decisive 17.2% advantage. This is a substantial margin in a compute-oriented workload, suggesting Intel's larger execution resources and shared-memory design handle OpenCL's data-parallel tasks more efficiently.

However, the tables turn in the Geekbench Vulkan test. Here, the AMD Radeon R5 M330 scores 4037, outperforming the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200's 3677 by 8.9%. Vulkan is a lower-level API that rewards explicit hardware control, and AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture appears better suited to extracting performance from this interface. The result is notable because the Intel part's newer API support (Vulkan 1.0 versus AMD's 1.2.170) does not translate into a win.

With one win each, the head-to-head record is tied at 1-1. The average benchmark score tells a similar story: Intel averages 4360, while AMD averages 4170. That is a 4.6% gap in Intel's favor, but the individual test results show how workload-dependent the comparison is. Intel's OpenCL lead (17.2%) is roughly double AMD's Vulkan lead (8.9%), which explains the overall average tilt toward Intel.

Look at the nearest rival lists for context. Intel's Iris Pro 5200 sits within 1.5% of the NVIDIA GeForce 930M and GT 645M, and within 0.6% of the RTX 4070 GDDR6 (a much newer, higher-tier card that happens to have a similar average score). AMD's R5 M330 is within 1.7% of the Quadro K2100M and K3000M, and within 1.9% of the RX 9060 XT 8 GB. These deltas are all small, indicating both GPUs occupy a performance tier where small architectural differences dictate wins.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design schools. Intel's Iris Pro Graphics 5200 uses the Haswell GT3e chip, built on a 22 nm process by Intel. It implements Generation 7.5 architecture, part of the HD Graphics (Haswell) family. AMD's Radeon R5 M330 uses the Exo chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process, with GCN 1.0 architecture from the Gem System (R5 M300) generation.

Process technology is a clear differentiator. Intel's 22 nm node is denser than AMD's 28 nm node, though AMD discloses its transistor count (690 million) and die size (56 mm²), yielding a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². Intel does not list these figures. The newer Intel process likely contributes to its higher clock behavior, but the raw specs tell a more nuanced story.

Clock speeds favor AMD. The R5 M330 runs at a 955 MHz base clock and 1030 MHz boost, while the Iris Pro 5200 starts at 200 MHz base and boosts to 1150 MHz. The Intel part's boost clock is higher, but its base clock is drastically lower — a design that suggests aggressive power management. AMD's higher sustained base clock gives it more consistent performance under load.

Core configurations are nearly identical in one key metric: both have 320 shading units. However, the distribution of other resources diverges. Intel packs 40 texture mapping units (TMUs) and only 4 render output units (ROPs). AMD counters with 20 TMUs and 8 ROPs. This explains the theoretical pixel rates: AMD achieves 8.240 GPixel/s versus Intel's 4.600 GPixel/s. Intel's texture rate is 46.00 GTexel/s, more than double AMD's 20.60 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute is close — Intel at 736.0 GFLOPS, AMD at 659.2 GFLOPS — with Intel leading by about 10%.

Memory architecture is a major split. Intel uses System Shared memory, meaning its frame buffer is carved from system RAM, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." AMD uses 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 14.40 GB/s. This dedicated memory gives AMD a fixed bandwidth figure, but the actual capacity and speed depend on system configuration for Intel.

API support differs subtly. Both support DirectX 12 (11_1), but AMD offers OpenGL 4.6 versus Intel's 4.3. Vulkan support also diverges: AMD lists version 1.2.170, while Intel only lists 1.0. These API versions do not always correlate with real-world performance, as the Vulkan benchmark result demonstrates.

Power and interface specs are starkly different. Intel's TDP is 45 W, while AMD's is only 18 W. Both are classified as IGP (integrated graphics processor) for slot width. Intel connects via Ring Bus, AMD via PCIe 3.0 x8. AMD lists no power connectors; Intel does not specify any either. Display outputs are motherboard-dependent for Intel and portable-device-dependent for AMD, reflecting their target platforms.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 scores 5042 in Geekbench OpenCL, beating the AMD Radeon R5 M330's 4302 by 17.2%. This is Intel's largest benchmark win.

Q: Does AMD win anywhere in the benchmarks?

A: Yes. The AMD Radeon R5 M330 scores 4037 in Geekbench Vulkan, beating the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200's 3677 by 8.9%. This gives AMD one win in the two-test comparison.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: They are tied. Both the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 and the AMD Radeon R5 M330 have exactly 320 shading units. However, Intel has 40 TMUs to AMD's 20, while AMD has 8 ROPs to Intel's 4.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: Intel relies on System Shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while AMD uses 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. AMD's dedicated memory provides a fixed, predictable bandwidth.

Q: What are the TDPs of these GPUs?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 has a 45 W TDP, while the AMD Radeon R5 M330 has an 18 W TDP. AMD is significantly more power-efficient on paper.

Q: Which GPU has better API support?

A: AMD leads in OpenGL (4.6 versus Intel's 4.3) and Vulkan (1.2.170 versus Intel's 1.0). Both support DirectX 12 (11_1). Despite Intel's lower Vulkan version, it still loses the Vulkan benchmark to AMD.

The Verdict

The data shows a balanced contest with a slight edge to Intel. Intel wins the OpenCL test by 17.2%, while AMD wins the Vulkan test by 8.9%. The average benchmark score favors Intel (4360 versus 4170), and Intel's percentile rank (26th) is marginally higher than AMD's (25th). However, these differences are small enough that the real-world choice depends on the application.

Intel's Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is the pick for users prioritizing compute-heavy tasks that leverage OpenCL, given its 17.2% lead in that specific test. Its higher FP32 throughput (736.0 GFLOPS versus 659.2 GFLOPS) and double the texture rate (46.00 GTexel/s versus 20.60 GTexel/s) reinforce its compute-oriented strengths. The 45 W TDP suggests it is designed for larger laptops with more thermal headroom.

AMD's Radeon R5 M330 is the better choice for Vulkan-based workloads, where it leads by 8.9%. Its lower TDP (18 W) makes it more suitable for thinner, more power-efficient designs. The dedicated 2 GB DDR3 memory with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth provides a stable memory environment that system-shared solutions cannot guarantee. AMD's higher pixel rate (8.240 GPixel/s versus 4.600 GPixel/s) also indicates stronger fill-rate performance.

Neither GPU is a clear overall winner. The tied head-to-head record (1-1) and the close average scores (4.6% apart) confirm this. Users should select based on the specific graphics API or workload they expect to encounter most frequently.

Specification Differences

The following table lists only the fields where the two GPUs differ:

| Specification | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 | AMD Radeon R5 M330 |

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

| Manufacturer | Intel | AMD |

| Chip | Haswell GT3e | Exo |

| Architecture | Generation 7.5 | GCN 1.0 |

| Generation | HD Graphics (Haswell) | Gem System (R5 M300) |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not listed | 690 million |

| Die Size | Not listed | 56 mm² |

| Transistor Density | Not listed | 12.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 200 MHz | 955 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1150 MHz | 1030 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 14.40 GB/s |

| TMUs | 40 | 20 |

| ROPs | 4 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 4.600 GPixel/s | 8.240 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 46.00 GTexel/s | 20.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 736.0 GFLOPS | 659.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 45 W | 18 W |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Bus Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Motherboard Dependent | Portable Device Dependent |

| OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.0 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2013-06-02 | 2015-05-04 |

| Predecessor | Not listed | Solar System |

| Successor | Not listed | Polaris Mobile |

Where Each One Wins

Intel's Iris Pro Graphics 5200 wins in OpenCL compute, posting a 17.2% higher score. It also excels in texture-heavy workloads, with 46.00 GTexel/s versus AMD's 20.60 GTexel/s. Its FP32 compute of 736.0 GFLOPS edges out AMD's 659.2 GFLOPS. The 22 nm process and higher boost clock (1150 MHz versus 1030 MHz) contribute to its compute advantage. This GPU suits applications that offload parallel math to the GPU via OpenCL.

AMD's Radeon R5 M330 wins in Vulkan rendering, with an 8.9% higher score. It dominates in pixel throughput, delivering 8.240 GPixel/s against Intel's 4.600 GPixel/s. The dedicated 2 GB DDR3 memory with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth provides a consistent frame buffer, unlike Intel's system-shared approach. AMD's lower TDP (18 W versus 45 W) makes it the better fit for thermally constrained laptops. Its higher base clock (955 MHz) ensures sustained performance without relying on boost behavior. For games or applications that use Vulkan, AMD is the data-backed choice. For OpenCL-focused compute tasks, Intel holds the edge.