AMD Radeon R5 M435 vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 Comparison

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 and the AMD Radeon R5 M435 are both end-of-life integrated-class graphics solutions, but they are separated by their fundamental design philosophies and performance ceilings. Benchmark data shows a clear winner in raw compute: the AMD Radeon R5 M435 outperforms the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 in the only directly comparable test, the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, by a significant 22.2%. However, the Intel part compensates with a broader feature set in API support and a higher overall percentile ranking, making the choice between them heavily dependent on the specific workload and software environment.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in compute benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M435 is decisively faster in compute. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD part scores 5859 points, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 4556 points. This represents a 22.2% performance advantage for the AMD Radeon R5 M435.

Q: How does their overall performance ranking compare?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 holds a higher percentile rank among all GPUs, sitting at the 35th percentile. The AMD Radeon R5 M435 is positioned lower, at the 33rd percentile. This indicates that despite losing the direct head-to-head benchmark, the Intel solution is ranked slightly higher in the broader database.

Q: What are the key differences in their closest competitors?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon HD 8690M, which scores 6137 and is only 0.3% faster. The AMD Radeon R5 M435's closest competitor is the AMD Radeon R7 M465, which scores 5841 and is 0.3% slower. This shows both GPUs are clustered tightly with their performance peers.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M435 has a higher pixel rate of 8.240 GPixel/s, compared to the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200's 6.600 GPixel/s. This suggests the AMD part may have an advantage in raw pixel processing throughput.

Q: Which GPU supports a newer version of OpenGL?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M435 supports OpenGL 4.6, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is limited to OpenGL 4.4. This means the AMD part has compatibility with more modern OpenGL applications and features.

Q: What are the differences in memory configuration?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M435 has a dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 36.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 relies on System Shared memory, with bandwidth that is System Dependent, meaning it varies based on the system's main memory configuration.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is stark, representing two distinct approaches to integrated graphics. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is built on the Broadwell GT3e chip, using Intel's Generation 8.0 architecture, also known as HD Graphics (Broadwell). It is fabricated on Intel's 14 nm process node. In contrast, the AMD Radeon R5 M435 is based on the Jet chip, utilizing the older GCN 1.0 architecture from the Gem System (R5 M400) generation. It is manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process node.

These foundational differences manifest in their core configurations. The Intel GPU boasts a higher number of shading units at 384, but is paired with 48 texture mapping units (TMUs) and only 6 render output units (ROPs). The AMD Radeon R5 M435 has fewer shading units at 320, but pairs them with 20 TMUs and 8 ROPs. The memory subsystems are also fundamentally different. Intel uses a System Shared memory architecture, where the GPU accesses the main system memory, making its bandwidth System Dependent. AMD, on the other hand, equips the R5 M435 with its own dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, offering a fixed 36.00 GB/s of bandwidth on a 64-bit bus.

Feature support also diverges. While both list DirectX 12 (11_1) support, the AMD part offers more advanced API compatibility with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is limited to OpenGL 4.4 and Vulkan 1.0. The bus interfaces also differ, with Intel using a Ring Bus and AMD using PCIe 3.0 x8. The AMD part is also the only one with disclosed transistor details, listing 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.3M / mm².

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents a clear split in capabilities, with each GPU holding an advantage in different areas. The AMD Radeon R5 M435 is the undisputed winner in raw compute performance. Its 5859 score in the Geekbench OpenCL test versus the Intel's 4556 demonstrates a substantial lead in general-purpose compute tasks that leverage OpenCL. This, combined with its higher pixel rate of 8.240 GPixel/s, suggests it is better suited for applications that require heavy mathematical processing or high-resolution pixel pushing.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200, despite its compute deficit, wins in the broader context of software compatibility and ecosystem ranking. Its support for a wider range of benchmark environments, as evidenced by its scores in Geekbench Metal (7764), Geekbench OpenCL (4556), and Geekbench Vulkan (6032), indicates a more versatile driver stack. Furthermore, its higher percentileVsAllGpus ranking of 35% compared to AMD's 33% suggests that in the aggregate of all tests in the database, the Intel part performs better relative to the entire GPU landscape. Its higher texture rate of 52.80 GTexel/s also indicates superior texture-fetching throughput, which could benefit certain texture-heavy workloads.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification, reflecting their different generations and design goals.

• Manufacturer & Architecture: Intel (Generation 8.0) vs. AMD (GCN 1.0)
• Process Node & Foundry: 14 nm (Intel) vs. 28 nm (TSMC)
• Transistors & Die Size: Not listed for Intel vs. 690 million transistors on 56 mm² for AMD
• Clock Speeds: Base 300 MHz, Boost 1100 MHz for Intel vs. Base 780 MHz, Boost 1030 MHz for AMD
• Memory Size & Type: System Shared for Intel vs. 2 GB GDDR5 for AMD
• Memory Bus Width & Bandwidth: System Shared / System Dependent for Intel vs. 64 bit / 36.00 GB/s for AMD
• Shading Units: 384 for Intel vs. 320 for AMD
• TMUs: 48 for Intel vs. 20 for AMD
• ROPs: 6 for Intel vs. 8 for AMD
• Pixel Rate: 6.600 GPixel/s for Intel vs. 8.240 GPixel/s for AMD
• Texture Rate: 52.80 GTexel/s for Intel vs. 20.60 GTexel/s for AMD
• FP32 (Floating Point Performance): 844.8 GFLOPS for Intel vs. 659.2 GFLOPS for AMD
• TDP: 15 W for Intel vs. Not listed for AMD
• Bus Interface: Ring Bus for Intel vs. PCIe 3.0 x8 for AMD
• API Support: Vulkan 1.0, OpenGL 4.4 for Intel vs. Vulkan 1.2.170, OpenGL 4.6 for AMD
• Release Date: 2014-09-04 for Intel vs. 2016-05-14 for AMD

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available between these two GPUs is the Geekbench OpenCL test. This is a critical metric for comparing compute performance, and the results are decisive in favor of the AMD Radeon R5 M435.

In this test, the AMD Radeon R5 M435 scores 5859 points, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 4556 points. The deltaPct of -22.2% (from the perspective of the Intel GPU) confirms that the AMD part is significantly faster, being roughly a quarter ahead in this specific workload. This is a substantial margin that would be noticeable in any application that heavily utilizes OpenCL for acceleration.

While the Intel GPU does not win this specific head-to-head, its benchmark profile shows strength in other APIs. It achieves a score of 7764 in Geekbench Metal and 6032 in Geekbench Vulkan, tests which the AMD Radeon R5 M435 has no recorded results for. This suggests that in a broader testing suite, the Intel part has a more robust set of strengths, even if it cannot match the AMD part's raw OpenCL performance.

The Verdict

The choice between the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 and the AMD Radeon R5 M435 is determined by the user's priority: raw compute throughput versus software ecosystem versatility.

For users whose primary applications are accelerated by OpenCL, the AMD Radeon R5 M435 is the clear choice. Its 22.2% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark is a decisive advantage that cannot be overlooked. This, combined with its dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory and higher pixel rate, makes it the more powerful option for specific computational tasks and certain modern rendering pipelines that favor its architecture.

However, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 should not be dismissed. Its higher percentile ranking (35th vs 33rd) and its performance in a wider array of benchmarks, including Metal and Vulkan, point to a more balanced overall package. Its significantly higher texture rate of 52.80 GTexel/s also indicates a potential advantage in texture-heavy 3D workloads. Ultimately, the data suggests the AMD Radeon R5 M435 is the performance pick for OpenCL-centric tasks, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is the more versatile candidate for a broader range of software environments.