AMD Radeon R7 M350 vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs split their head-to-head benchmark wins exactly, with one decisive victory each. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon R7 M350 posts a score of 6991, which is 53.4% higher than the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200's 4556. That is a commanding margin, placing the AMD part firmly ahead in compute workloads that scale across shading units. The Intel part, however, strikes back in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 6032 against AMD's 5662, a 6.1% advantage. While the Vulkan gap is much narrower than the OpenCL gap, it flips the overall win tally to 1-1.

Looking at average benchmark scores across all tests, the AMD Radeon R7 M350 edges ahead with 6327 versus Intel's 6117, a difference of roughly 3.4%. Both GPUs sit in similar percentile territory relative to all GPUs, with AMD at the 36th percentile and Intel at the 35th. The nearest rivals for each part reinforce this close positioning. AMD's R7 M350 sits effectively tied with the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 (6330, 0% delta) and the NVIDIA Quadro K620 (6282, 0.7% delta). The Intel Iris Pro 6200 is likewise bracketed by the AMD Radeon HD 8690M (6137, -0.3% delta) and the NVIDIA RTX A400 (6078, 0.6% delta). The data shows two parts that land in the same performance band, but with very different strengths depending on the API.

The OpenCL result is the headline number here. A 53.4% delta is not a marginal win; it signals that the AMD architecture handles OpenCL's execution model substantially better. The Vulkan result, by contrast, shows Intel's integrated solution can hold its own—and then some—when the workload is more driver-optimized or better suited to its tile-based rendering approach. Neither part dominates the other outright, which makes the architectural differences below all the more relevant for understanding why each wins where it does.

Architecture Differences

The underlying designs could hardly be more different. The AMD Radeon R7 M350 uses the Meso chip built on GCN 3.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. Intel's Iris Pro Graphics 6200 uses the Broadwell GT3e die with Generation 8.0 architecture, fabricated in-house on a 14 nm process. That process gap is significant: Intel's 14 nm node offers a density advantage, though AMD's chip still packs 1,550 million transistors into a 125 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.4 million per mm². Intel does not disclose transistor count or die size for its Broadwell GT3e, but the 14 nm process is a generational step ahead of AMD's 28 nm.

Core configuration reveals another split. Both GPUs have 384 shading units, but the AMD part pairs them with 24 texture mapping units and 8 raster operation pipelines. Intel's Iris Pro 6200 has 48 TMUs and 6 ROPs. That means Intel has double the texture throughput capacity relative to its shading units, while AMD has more ROPs for pixel output. The texture rate numbers confirm this: Intel achieves 52.80 GTexel/s versus AMD's 24.36 GTexel/s, a 116% advantage in texture fill. AMD counters with a pixel rate of 8.120 GPixel/s versus Intel's 6.600 GPixel/s, a 23% edge in raw pixel throughput.

Clock speeds differ substantially. AMD runs at a 1000 MHz base and 1015 MHz boost, while Intel idles at a 300 MHz base but boosts to 1100 MHz. That boost clock is higher than AMD's, but the base clock is far lower—the Intel part relies on aggressive boosting to reach its performance. In terms of raw FP32 compute, Intel edges ahead at 844.8 GFLOPS versus AMD's 779.5 GFLOPS, a difference of about 8.4%. AMD also lists FP16 at 779.5 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while Intel does not report an FP16 figure.

Memory architecture is a fundamental divider. AMD uses 4 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel's Iris Pro 6200 uses system shared memory, with no dedicated VRAM, a shared bus width, and bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." That means Intel's memory performance varies with the host system's RAM configuration, while AMD has a fixed, dedicated pool. The API support also differs: AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while Intel supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0. AMD's newer API versions give it an edge in feature compatibility, particularly for Vulkan 1.2.170 versus Intel's 1.0.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 M350 wins decisively in OpenCL compute. Its 6991 OpenCL score is not just ahead of Intel's 4556—it is ahead by more than half, a margin that suggests heavy compute workloads, GPGPU tasks, and OpenCL-accelerated applications will run noticeably better on the AMD part. The dedicated 4 GB VRAM also helps in scenarios where memory capacity and isolation matter, since the Intel part must share system memory and bandwidth. For pixel-bound rendering, AMD's higher ROP count and pixel rate (8.120 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s) give it an edge in fill-rate-limited scenarios, such as high-resolution framebuffer operations or traditional rasterized scenes with heavy overdraw.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 wins in Vulkan, posting 6032 versus AMD's 5662. That 6.1% lead suggests that Vulkan-optimized games and applications—particularly those that leverage modern low-overhead graphics APIs—will perform slightly better on the Intel part. Intel's massive texture rate advantage (52.80 GTexel/s versus 24.36 GTexel/s) means texture-heavy workloads, such as complex material shading or procedural texture generation, will favor the Intel GPU. Its higher boost clock (1100 MHz versus 1015 MHz) and higher FP32 throughput (844.8 GFLOPS versus 779.5 GFLOPS) also help in compute-light but frequency-sensitive tasks. Additionally, the Intel part's 14 nm process and integrated nature mean it draws far less power—15 W TDP versus AMD's undisclosed figure—making it the better fit for thermally constrained or battery-powered systems.

The split is clean: AMD for compute and dedicated memory, Intel for modern API performance and texture throughput. Neither GPU dominates the other's home turf, which is unusual for parts this closely matched in average score.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two GPUs:

| Specification | AMD Radeon R7 M350 | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Generation 8.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (Intel) |

| Transistors | 1,550 million | Not disclosed |

| Die Size | 125 mm² | Not disclosed |

| Transistor Density | 12.4M / mm² | Not disclosed |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1015 MHz | 1100 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 16.00 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Texture Mapping Units | 24 | 48 |

| Raster Operation Pipelines | 8 | 6 |

| Pixel Rate | 8.120 GPixel/s | 6.600 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 24.36 GTexel/s | 52.80 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 779.5 GFLOPS | 844.8 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 779.5 GFLOPS (1:1) | Not disclosed |

| TDP | Not disclosed | 15 W |

| Slot Width | Not disclosed | IGP |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | Ring Bus |

| Display Outputs | Not disclosed | Motherboard Dependent |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_1) |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.4 |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.0 |

| Release Date | 2015-05-04 | 2014-09-04 |

Both parts share 384 shading units and neither has ray tracing cores or tensor cores. Both are end-of-life products. AMD lists its generation as "Gem System (R7 M300)" and its predecessor as "Solar System" with successor "Polaris Mobile," while Intel lists no predecessor or successor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M350 averages 6327 across all benchmark tests, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 averages 6117. AMD leads by roughly 3.4%, and both sit in the mid-30s percentile (36th for AMD, 35th for Intel) relative to all GPUs.

Q: How big is the OpenCL performance gap between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M350 scores 6991 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the Intel Iris Pro 6200's 4556, giving AMD a 53.4% advantage. This is the largest performance delta between the two parts in any benchmark.

Q: Does the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Intel part scores 6032 against AMD's 5662, a 6.1% lead. It also has a Geekbench Metal score of 7764, though the AMD part does not have a Metal result for comparison.

Q: How do their memory configurations differ?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M350 has 4 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 uses system shared memory, with shared bus width and system-dependent bandwidth, meaning its performance depends on the host system's RAM.

Q: Which GPU has higher texture and pixel throughput?

A: The Intel Iris Pro 6200 has the higher texture rate at 52.80 GTexel/s versus AMD's 24.36 GTexel/s. The AMD R7 M350 has the higher pixel rate at 8.120 GPixel/s versus Intel's 6.600 GPixel/s.

Q: What are the API version differences?

A: AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Intel supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0. AMD's API versions are newer across the board, particularly for Vulkan where the difference is 1.2.170 versus 1.0.