AMD Radeon R6 M255DX vs Intel HD Graphics P530 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a close contest between two end-of-life integrated graphics solutions, with the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX holding a narrow edge. In the single head-to-head benchmark available, Geekbench Vulkan, the AMD part scores 4867 against Intel’s 4571, a 6.5% advantage. The AMD GPU also sits at the 28th percentile of all GPUs, two points higher than Intel’s 26th percentile. The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX is the pick for users prioritizing raw compute throughput in Vulkan workloads, while the Intel HD Graphics P530 offers a more modern feature set and significantly lower power draw.

The data suggests neither part is a performance powerhouse. Both fall in the bottom third of the GPU landscape. The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M (0.2% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX (0.5% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (0.5% behind). The Intel HD Graphics P530’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 560 (0.2% ahead), the AMD Radeon R5 M230 (0.4% ahead), and the AMD FirePro W4190M (1.2% behind). These tight deltas indicate that both chips operate in a crowded performance band where minor architectural differences decide outcomes.

For users who already own a system with one of these GPUs, the practical difference in day-to-day use will be minimal. The AMD part wins the only direct comparison, but the Intel part counters with better API support, including Vulkan 1.3 versus AMD’s 1.2.170, and a full DirectX 12 (12_1) feature level versus AMD’s 12 (11_1). The choice between them should hinge on whether the user prioritizes the slight performance edge of the AMD chip or the superior feature set and efficiency of the Intel chip.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX wins in raw compute performance. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 4867 is 6.5% higher than Intel’s 4571. The AMD chip’s shading unit count of 320 versus Intel’s 192 provides a substantial theoretical advantage in parallel workloads. Its pixel rate of 6.840 GPixel/s is more than double Intel’s 3.000 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 17.10 GTexel/s edges out Intel’s 16.00 GTexel/s. The AMD part’s FP32 throughput of 547.2 GFLOPS is 42.5% higher than Intel’s 384.0 GFLOPS.

The Intel HD Graphics P530 wins in efficiency and API modernity. Its TDP is rated at 15 W, while the AMD part has no published TDP in the data. Intel’s architecture, Generation 9.0 on a 14 nm+ process, is newer than AMD’s GCN 1.0 on a 28 nm process. Intel supports Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_1), while AMD supports Vulkan 1.2.170 and DirectX 12 (11_1). Intel also offers FP16 support at 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1), a capability the AMD part lacks entirely. For systems where thermals and power draw are critical, the Intel part is the clear choice.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and process nodes. The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX uses the Jet chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It integrates 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The chip belongs to the Gem System Hybrid (Rx M200) generation. The Intel HD Graphics P530 uses the Skylake GT2 chip built on Generation 9.0 architecture, fabricated by Intel on a 14 nm+ process. Its die size is 123 mm², though transistor count and density are not listed in the data. It belongs to the HD Graphics-W (Skylake) generation.

The compute resources differ significantly. AMD fields 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. Intel counters with 192 shading units, 16 TMUs, and only 3 ROPs. The AMD chip’s ROP advantage is pronounced, which explains its pixel rate of 6.840 GPixel/s versus Intel’s 3.000 GPixel/s. Both parts share system memory with a system-dependent bandwidth, so memory performance is not directly comparable.

Clock speeds show a contrasting design philosophy. AMD runs a base clock of 780 MHz with a boost to 855 MHz. Intel runs a much lower base clock of 350 MHz but boosts to 1000 MHz. The higher sustained clocks on the AMD part contribute to its compute advantage, while Intel’s boost behavior suggests a more power-conscious approach.

API support differs in important ways. Intel supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. AMD supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The higher DirectX feature level on Intel matters for modern games that leverage tier-1 features. Intel also supports FP16 at 768.0 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, which can accelerate certain compute workloads. AMD lists no FP16 capability.

Both chips are integrated graphics processors with an IGP slot width. AMD connects via an IGP bus interface, while Intel uses a Ring Bus. Display outputs are platform-dependent for both: AMD is portable-device dependent, and Intel is motherboard dependent. Both are end-of-life products, with AMD released in January 2014 and Intel in August 2015.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench Vulkan score?

A: The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX scores 4867, which is 6.5% higher than the Intel HD Graphics P530’s 4571.

Q: What is the TDP of the Intel HD Graphics P530?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P530 has a TDP of 15 W. The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX has no TDP listed in the data.

Q: Which GPU supports a newer DirectX version?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P530 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX supports DirectX 12 (11_1).

Q: How do their shading unit counts compare?

A: The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX has 320 shading units, while the Intel HD Graphics P530 has 192 shading units.

Q: What is the FP32 performance difference?

A: The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX delivers 547.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 42.5% higher than the Intel HD Graphics P530’s 384.0 GFLOPS.

Q: Do both GPUs support Vulkan?

A: Yes, but with different versions. The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the Intel HD Graphics P530 supports Vulkan 1.3.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the data is Geekbench Vulkan, and it favors the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX. The AMD part scores 4867, while the Intel HD Graphics P530 scores 4571, a 6.5% delta in AMD’s favor. This result aligns with the AMD chip’s substantial compute resource advantage: 320 shading units versus 192, 20 TMUs versus 16, and 8 ROPs versus 3. The AMD part’s FP32 throughput of 547.2 GFLOPS gives it a theoretical 42.5% advantage over Intel’s 384.0 GFLOPS, yet the actual benchmark delta is much smaller at 6.5%, indicating that real-world Vulkan performance is constrained by other factors such as memory bandwidth, driver overhead, or clock behavior.

The Intel HD Graphics P530’s nearest rival data provides context for its performance. Its average benchmark score is 4560, and its closest competitor is the AMD Radeon RX 560 at 4569, a 0.2% difference. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 sits 0.4% ahead at 4577, while the AMD FirePro W4190M is 1.2% behind at 4505. The NVIDIA Quadro M3000M is 1.3% ahead at 4621. These numbers show that the Intel part sits in a tight cluster where performance differences are within noise margins.

Similarly, the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX’s nearest rivals illustrate its positioning. Its average benchmark score is 4867. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M scores 4855, a 0.2% difference. The NVIDIA GeForce 940MX scores 4844, 0.5% behind. The NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 scores 4893, 0.5% ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB scores 4901, 0.7% ahead. The presence of a modern RTX card in this list underscores how the AMD part’s Vulkan score is competitive with much newer hardware.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the AMD part’s average score of 4867 places it at the 28th percentile of all GPUs. The Intel part’s average score of 4560 places it at the 26th percentile. Both are in the lower third, which means they are suitable for light workloads and older games rather than demanding modern titles. The AMD part’s higher pixel rate of 6.840 GPixel/s versus 3.000 GPixel/s for Intel suggests better fill-rate-bound scenarios, while the texture rates are closer at 17.10 GTexel/s versus 16.00 GTexel/s.

The AMD chip’s base clock of 780 MHz with a boost to 855 MHz is notably higher than Intel’s base of 350 MHz with a 1000 MHz boost. This means AMD sustains higher minimum performance, while Intel can spike higher under boost conditions but has a much lower baseline. For consistent frame delivery in sustained workloads, the AMD part’s higher base clock is an advantage, but its lack of a published TDP raises questions about power consumption in thermally constrained laptops.

Intel’s FP16 capability at 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1) is a feature absent from the AMD part. This matters for compute workloads that leverage half-precision arithmetic, such as certain machine learning inference tasks or image processing. The AMD part is limited to FP32 at 547.2 GFLOPS, which is lower than Intel’s FP16 throughput but higher than Intel’s FP32 figure. Users with FP16-optimized software would prefer the Intel part, despite its lower overall Vulkan score.

The release dates show a generational gap. AMD launched in January 2014, while Intel launched in August 2015. The Intel part’s newer architecture on a 14 nm+ process explains its superior API support and efficiency. The AMD part’s older GCN 1.0 architecture on 28 nm is less efficient but offers more raw compute resources. Both are end-of-life products, so users should not expect driver optimizations going forward. The data suggests that for legacy systems, the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX provides slightly better Vulkan performance, while the Intel HD Graphics P530 offers better feature support and power efficiency.