AMD Radeon R7 Graphics vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a split decision between the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics and the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200, with each integrated solution taking one of the two benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 delivers a score of 5042, which is 20.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics score of 4015. This is a substantial margin, placing the Intel part clearly in front for general-purpose compute workloads that rely on the OpenCL API.

However, the Geekbench Vulkan test flips the result decisively. The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics scores 5980, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 manages only 3677. The delta here is 62.6% in favor of AMD, a much larger relative gap than Intel's OpenCL advantage. In absolute terms, AMD's Vulkan score is 2303 points higher than Intel's OpenCL score is above AMD's OpenCL result. The Vulkan benchmark appears to expose a fundamental weakness in the Intel architecture, whereas the AMD implementation scales far better under this API.

Looking at the average benchmark score across both tests, the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics posts 4998, which is 638 points higher than the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200's average of 4360. The AMD part also sits at the 29th percentile among all GPUs in the database, compared to the 26th percentile for Intel. While both are low-ranked parts overall, the AMD solution has a modest but consistent edge in the aggregate.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context for these scores. The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics sits within a tight cluster: the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 averages 4979 (0.4% behind AMD), the AMD Radeon R5 M430 averages 5018 (0.4% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB averages 4970 (0.6% behind), and the AMD FirePro W4170M averages 5034 (0.7% ahead). This places the AMD IGP in the middle of a band of very similar performers, with all four rivals within a 1.3% spread. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 also clusters tightly: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 averages 4335 (0.6% behind Intel), the NVIDIA GeForce 930M averages 4388 (0.6% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M averages 4411 (1.2% ahead), and the AMD FirePro W2100 averages 4295 (1.5% behind). Intel's position is slightly weaker, with the spread of rivals extending more in the positive direction.

The head-to-head results indicate that neither part is a universal winner. The Intel part's OpenCL advantage of 20.4% is significant, but the AMD part's Vulkan advantage of 62.6% is three times larger in relative terms. When averaging the two tests, AMD's lead emerges because its Vulkan strength outweighs Intel's OpenCL strength by a wide margin.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark wins map cleanly onto API preferences. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 wins in OpenCL, which is the older and more established compute API for heterogeneous systems. In this test, Intel's 5042 score represents a 20.4% advantage over AMD's 4015. This suggests that Intel's Generation 7.5 architecture, with its 320 shading units and 40 texture mapping units, is well-optimized for OpenCL workloads. The higher texture rate of 46.00 GTexel/s and the higher FP32 throughput of 736.0 GFLOPS both support this outcome, as OpenCL tasks often stress raw arithmetic throughput.

The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics wins decisively in Vulkan, posting 5980 against Intel's 3677. The 62.6% margin is one of the larger deltas seen among integrated graphics parts in this database tier. AMD's GCN 2.0 architecture supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while Intel's part only reaches Vulkan 1.0. This API version gap likely explains much of the performance difference. The AMD part also has more shading units (384 vs. 320) and a higher pixel rate (5.760 GPixel/s vs. 4.600 GPixel/s), which may contribute to its Vulkan strength.

For users prioritizing OpenCL compute, the Intel part is the clear choice. For users running Vulkan-based applications or games, the AMD part is overwhelmingly faster. The aggregate average favors AMD, 4998 vs. 4360, so in a mixed workload the AMD part will generally finish ahead. However, the magnitude of Intel's OpenCL win cannot be ignored for compute-specific tasks.

The data does not show a single test where both parts are close. Each benchmark has a decisive winner, which makes the choice highly dependent on the target application. There is no middle ground in this comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two integrated processors come from different foundries and process nodes. AMD builds the Radeon R7 Graphics on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with a die size of 245 mm² and 2,410 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 9.8 million per mm². Intel fabricates the Iris Pro Graphics 5200 on a 22 nm process at Intel, with transistor counts and die size not recorded in the database. The process difference is notable: 28 nm vs. 22 nm, but AMD's larger transistor budget and die area compensate for the older node.

The AMD chip is designated "Spectre Lite" and uses the GCN 2.0 architecture, part of the Kaveri generation of accelerated processing units. Intel's chip is Haswell GT3e, using Generation 7.5 architecture from the HD Graphics (Haswell) generation. AMD's architecture supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Intel's part supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.3, and Vulkan 1.0. The API support differences are stark: AMD supports a newer DirectX feature level, a newer OpenGL version, and a much newer Vulkan version.

Compute resources differ in configuration. AMD has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. Intel has 320 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and only 4 render output units. Intel's texture mapping unit count is 66.7% higher, which explains its texture rate of 46.00 GTexel/s vs. AMD's 17.28 GTexel/s. AMD's render output unit count is double Intel's, which supports its pixel rate of 5.760 GPixel/s vs. Intel's 4.600 GPixel/s. The FP32 throughput favors Intel at 736.0 GFLOPS vs. AMD's 553.0 GFLOPS, a 33.1% advantage.

Clock behavior also differs. Intel lists a base clock of 200 MHz and a boost clock of 1150 MHz. AMD's base and boost clocks are not recorded in the database. Both parts use system shared memory, with system-dependent bandwidth. The power envelope shows Intel at 45 W TDP, while AMD is rated at 25 W TDP. This 20 W difference suggests AMD achieves its results with a lower power budget, though the performance profiles are not directly tied to this in the data.

Both parts connect via integrated graphics pathways, with AMD using an IGP bus interface and Intel using a Ring Bus. Display outputs are motherboard dependent for both. Neither part has a launch MSRP recorded. The AMD part was released on 2014-02-16, with the Intel part released on 2013-06-02. Both are end-of-life products. AMD's predecessor is TeraScale 3 IGP, and its successor is GCN 3.0 IGP. Intel has no recorded predecessor or successor in the database.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split decision. For OpenCL compute workloads, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is the stronger part, delivering a 20.4% higher score. Its higher FP32 throughput of 736.0 GFLOPS and texture rate of 46.00 GTexel/s align with this result. For Vulkan workloads, the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics is overwhelmingly stronger, with a 62.6% higher score. Its newer Vulkan 1.2.170 support, double the render output units, and 384 shading units all contribute to this outcome.

The aggregate average benchmark score favors AMD at 4998 vs. 4360, a 14.6% difference. The percentile rankings also favor AMD, with the 29th percentile vs. Intel's 26th percentile among all GPUs. However, the nearest rival comparisons show both parts are closely matched to their respective peers. AMD's nearest rivals are within a 0.7% band, and Intel's within a 1.5% band, indicating that neither part is an outlier in its performance class.

Users who rely on OpenCL-based applications, such as certain scientific computing or video processing tools, should favor the Intel part based on the recorded data. Users who run Vulkan-based games or modern graphics workloads should choose the AMD part without hesitation. For a general-purpose system with mixed workloads, the AMD part's higher average score and superior Vulkan performance make it the safer choice, provided the application stack does not depend heavily on OpenCL. The power difference is also relevant: AMD's 25 W TDP vs. Intel's 45 W TDP means the AMD part achieves its average advantage with a lower thermal envelope.

The database does not record any test where both parts are competitive. Each benchmark has a clear winner, and the choice is dictated by the API used in the target workload. The AMD part also offers broader API support with DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, which future-proofs it better than Intel's DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.3, and Vulkan 1.0.

FAQ

Q: Which integrated GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics has an average benchmark score of 4998, which is 638 points higher than the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200's average of 4360.

Q: How large is AMD's Vulkan advantage over Intel?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics scores 5980 vs. Intel's 3677, a delta of 62.6% in favor of AMD.

Q: How large is Intel's OpenCL advantage over AMD?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 scores 5042 vs. AMD's 4015, a delta of 20.4% in favor of Intel.

Q: Which part has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics has 384 shading units, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 has 320 shading units.

Q: What are the API support differences between the two parts?

A: AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Intel supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.3, and Vulkan 1.0.

Q: How do the power ratings compare?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics is rated at 25 W TDP, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is rated at 45 W TDP.