AMD Radeon R7 M360 vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a split decision between these two mobile graphics parts. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 posts 5042 points against 4638 points for the AMD Radeon R7 M360, giving Intel an 8% lead. That is a meaningful gap for compute-heavy workloads that rely on OpenCL acceleration, and it aligns with the Iris Pro part having a higher texture rate and a more efficient architecture for certain shader tasks.

The Vulkan result flips the script decisively. The AMD Radeon R7 M360 scores 5223 points, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 manages only 3677 points. That is a 42% advantage for AMD, which is a massive margin in any benchmark comparison. Vulkan is a lower-level API that rewards raw shader throughput and memory bandwidth, and the R7 M360's dedicated DDR3 memory with a 64-bit bus appears to give it a substantial edge in this test.

Looking at the broader database context, the AMD part sits at the 29th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 4931. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 M265 at 4929 (a 0% delta), the AMD FirePro W5130M at 4904 (0.6% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 at 4893 (0.8% ahead). The Intel part, by contrast, is at the 26th percentile with an average score of 4360. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce 930M at 4388 (0.6% behind Intel), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M at 4411 (1.2% behind), and the AMD FirePro W2100 at 4295 (1.5% behind Intel). So while the Intel part wins OpenCL, its overall average is dragged down by the weak Vulkan result.

The wins are evenly split at one apiece, but the magnitude of the Vulkan victory is far larger than the OpenCL margin. The AMD card is 42% ahead in Vulkan, while the Intel part is only 8% ahead in OpenCL. For a gamer or someone using Vulkan-based applications, that difference is decisive.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R7 M360 is built on the Meso chip using GCN 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.4 million per square millimeter. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 uses the Haswell GT3e chip with Generation 7.5 architecture, built on Intel's 22 nm process. The Intel part has no listed transistor count or die size in the database, so direct density comparisons are not possible.

The AMD part features 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The Intel part has 320 shading units, 40 TMUs, and only 4 ROPs. This is an interesting split: Intel has more texture units but far fewer ROPs, which explains why its pixel rate is lower at 4.600 GPixel/s versus 9.000 GPixel/s for AMD. However, Intel's texture rate is markedly higher at 46.00 GTexel/s versus 27.00 GTexel/s for AMD. The FP32 compute throughput tells a similar story: AMD puts out 864.0 GFLOPS, while Intel manages 736.0 GFLOPS.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The AMD card has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part relies on system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent" and no dedicated VRAM. This is a critical distinction for gaming and graphics workloads, as dedicated memory avoids contention with the CPU and provides predictable performance.

The API support also diverges. 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. The AMD part has a more modern feature set, particularly for Vulkan, which likely contributes to its dominant Vulkan benchmark showing.

The Intel part is an integrated GPU (IGP) with a 45 W TDP, while the AMD part has no listed TDP. The Intel part connects via Ring Bus, while AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Intel's display outputs are motherboard dependent, which is typical for integrated graphics.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 M360 wins decisively in Vulkan-based workloads. The 42% margin over the Intel part in the Vulkan benchmark suggests that any application leveraging Vulkan's low overhead and explicit control will perform significantly better on the AMD card. This includes modern game engines, Vulkan-enabled emulators, and compute workloads that use Vulkan's compute queues.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 wins in OpenCL compute tasks. The 8% lead in OpenCL indicates that applications optimized for OpenCL, such as certain video encoding tools, image processing filters, or scientific compute routines, will run slightly faster on the Intel part. The higher texture rate of 46.00 GTexel/s versus 27.00 GTexel/s also suggests Intel has an advantage in texture-heavy workloads, even if its pixel throughput is lower.

For gaming, the AMD card's dedicated 2 GB memory and higher pixel rate (9.000 GPixel/s versus 4.600 GPixel/s) make it the stronger candidate for rasterization-heavy scenes. The Intel part's system shared memory can become a bottleneck under memory pressure, especially in modern games that require several gigabytes of VRAM.

For power-constrained laptops, the Intel part's 45 W TDP is explicitly listed, while the AMD part has no TDP figure in the database. That absence makes a direct power comparison impossible from the recorded data, but the Intel part's integrated nature means it shares thermal and power budgets with the CPU.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every category where data exists. The AMD Radeon R7 M360 uses a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 uses a 22 nm process at Intel. AMD's chip contains 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die; Intel has no listed transistor or die data.

Clock speeds: AMD has a base of 1100 MHz and a boost of 1125 MHz, with memory at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective). Intel has a base of 200 MHz and a boost of 1150 MHz, with system shared memory. The AMD part's higher base clock is offset by Intel's higher boost clock, but the memory situation is entirely different.

Memory: AMD has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. Intel has system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. No further detail is available for Intel's memory configuration.

Compute units: AMD has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Intel has 320 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. AMD's pixel rate is 9.000 GPixel/s versus 4.600 GPixel/s for Intel. Intel's texture rate is 46.00 GTexel/s versus 27.00 GTexel/s for AMD. FP32 performance is 864.0 GFLOPS for AMD and 736.0 GFLOPS for Intel. AMD also lists FP16 at 864.0 GFLOPS (1:1), while Intel has no FP16 figure.

Bus interface: AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x8, Intel uses Ring Bus. 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. The AMD part's production status is end-of-life, as is Intel's. AMD's release date is May 2015, Intel's is June 2013.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M360 has an average benchmark score of 4931, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 has an average of 4360. AMD is about 13% higher on average.

Q: How do the Vulkan scores compare?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M360 scores 5223 in the Vulkan benchmark, which is 42% higher than the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200's score of 3677.

Q: Is the Intel part better in any benchmark?

A: Yes, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 wins the OpenCL benchmark with 5042 points versus 4638 points for the AMD Radeon R7 M360, an 8% advantage.

Q: What memory configurations do the two parts use?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M360 has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which part has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M360 has 384 shading units, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 has 320 shading units. AMD also has more ROPs (8 versus 4), but Intel has more TMUs (40 versus 24).

Q: What API versions are supported?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M360 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.3, and Vulkan 1.0.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload. If your priority is Vulkan performance, the AMD Radeon R7 M360 is the only choice between these two. A 42% lead in the Vulkan benchmark is not a marginal difference; it represents a fundamental advantage in modern graphics APIs. The AMD part also has dedicated memory, which is a practical benefit for gaming and any application that needs consistent VRAM allocation.

If your workload is OpenCL-centric, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 has a modest 8% edge. That is enough to matter for compute tasks that repeatedly call OpenCL kernels, but it is not a large margin. The Intel part also has a higher texture rate, which could benefit texture-heavy rendering pipelines.

For general use, the AMD part's higher average benchmark score (4931 versus 4360) and its position at the 29th percentile versus Intel's 26th percentile suggest it is the stronger overall performer. The AMD card also supports newer API versions, including Vulkan 1.2.170 and OpenGL 4.6, which means better compatibility with current software.

The Intel part's only advantages are the OpenCL win, a higher boost clock (1150 MHz versus 1125 MHz), more TMUs, and a listed 45 W TDP. If power draw is a hard constraint and you know your software uses OpenCL, the Intel part is defensible. Otherwise, the AMD Radeon R7 M360 is the better buy based on the recorded benchmarks, especially for Vulkan and gaming workloads. The 42% Vulkan margin is the single largest performance gap in this comparison, and it decisively favors AMD.