AMD Radeon R7 M365X vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 records an average benchmark score of 6117, while the AMD Radeon R7 M365X sits at 5416. That places the Intel part roughly 13% ahead in the aggregate database metric.

Q: How do the two compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M365X wins decisively in the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5939 versus 4556 for the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200, a 23.3% margin in AMD's favor.

Q: Which GPU wins the Vulkan benchmark?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 takes the Vulkan test with a score of 6032 against AMD's 4893, reversing the OpenCL result by the exact same 23.3% delta.

Q: What are the percentile rankings of these GPUs?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 ranks in the 35th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the AMD Radeon R7 M365X ranks in the 32nd percentile. Both are entry-level to mid-range mobile parts.

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, both report DirectX 12 (11_1) support. However, the AMD part lists OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170, whereas Intel lists OpenGL 4.4 and Vulkan 1.0.

Q: What is the memory configuration for each?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 uses system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. The AMD Radeon R7 M365X has 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is built on Intel's Broadwell GT3e chip using Generation 8.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at Intel's own foundry. It is an integrated GPU (IGP) that connects via a Ring Bus interface and shares system memory. The AMD Radeon R7 M365X, in contrast, uses AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture on the Litho chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It is a discrete mobile GPU that connects over PCIe 3.0 x8.

The process node difference is substantial: 14 nm versus 28 nm, which gives Intel a density advantage in manufacturing, though the AMD chip is a separate physical part with its own memory. The AMD GPU has 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The Intel part's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

Shading unit counts are identical at 384, but the internal composition differs. Intel packs 48 texture mapping units (TMUs) and 6 render output units (ROPs), while AMD uses 24 TMUs and 8 ROPs. This means Intel has double the texture throughput hardware but fewer pixel output units. The pixel rates are identical at 6.600 GPixel/s for both, but Intel's texture rate is 52.80 GTexel/s versus AMD's 19.80 GTexel/s, a 2.67x advantage for Intel in texture fill.

Floating-point performance also favors Intel: 844.8 GFLOPS FP32 versus 633.6 GFLOPS for AMD, a 33% advantage. The Intel GPU runs at a base clock of 300 MHz with a boost of 1100 MHz, while the AMD part's clock speeds are not recorded. AMD's memory runs at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective data rate.

API support differs meaningfully. Both support DirectX 12 (11_1), but AMD lists OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170, while Intel lists OpenGL 4.4 and Vulkan 1.0. The Intel GPU draws 15 W TDP, while AMD's TDP is not recorded. Intel's production status is end-of-life, released in September 2014; AMD's is also end-of-life, released in May 2015.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split is clean: one win each in the two recorded tests. The AMD Radeon R7 M365X dominates in OpenCL compute workloads, scoring 5939 versus Intel's 4556. That 23.3% advantage suggests AMD's GCN architecture handles raw compute tasks like data-parallel processing and OpenCL kernels more efficiently in this comparison. Users running compute-heavy applications that leverage OpenCL would see measurable gains on the AMD part.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 wins in Vulkan, posting 6032 against AMD's 4893, again by 23.3%. Vulkan workloads, which include modern game rendering and graphics APIs that expose lower-level hardware control, favor Intel's design here. The Intel GPU's higher texture rate and FP32 throughput likely contribute to this advantage in graphics-oriented tasks.

The average benchmark scores tell a broader story. Intel's 6117 average sits above AMD's 5416, placing Intel in the 35th percentile versus AMD's 32nd. The nearest rivals contextualize these numbers: Intel's closest competitor is the AMD Radeon HD 8690M (6137 average, 0.3% higher), followed by the NVIDIA RTX A400 (6078, 0.6% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (6077, 0.7% lower), and the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (6049, 1.1% lower). AMD's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 610M (5444, 0.5% higher), the Intel UHD Graphics P630 (5370, 0.9% lower), the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (5467, 0.9% higher), and the AMD Radeon R7 M445 (5358, 1.1% lower).

In practical terms, the Intel part is better suited for applications that use Vulkan or rely on high texture throughput, while the AMD part is stronger for OpenCL-based compute. The Intel GPU also carries a lower process node and integrated design, which matters for systems where power draw and space are constrained. The AMD GPU offers dedicated GDDR5 memory, which helps in scenarios where bandwidth isolation from system RAM is beneficial.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs diverge on several key specifications. Intel uses a 14 nm process node from its own foundry, while AMD uses TSMC's 28 nm process. Intel's chip is Broadwell GT3e with Generation 8.0 architecture; AMD's chip is Litho with GCN 1.0 architecture. Intel's memory is system shared with system dependent bandwidth, whereas AMD has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Texture mapping units differ: Intel has 48 TMUs, AMD has 24. Render output units differ: Intel has 6 ROPs, AMD has 8. Clock specifications also differ: Intel lists a 300 MHz base and 1100 MHz boost, while AMD's clocks are not recorded. Memory clock for AMD is 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective, while Intel's memory clock is listed as system shared.

Texture rate favors Intel at 52.80 GTexel/s versus 19.80 GTexel/s for AMD. FP32 performance favors Intel at 844.8 GFLOPS versus 633.6 GFLOPS. Pixel rate is identical at 6.600 GPixel/s for both. The bus interface differs: Intel uses Ring Bus, AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x8. AMD's transistor count is 950 million on a 77 mm² die with 12.3M / mm² density; Intel's transistor data is not recorded.

API support differs in OpenGL and Vulkan versions. Intel lists OpenGL 4.4 and Vulkan 1.0; AMD lists OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support DirectX 12 (11_1). Display outputs are motherboard dependent for Intel and not recorded for AMD. TDP is 15 W for Intel and not recorded for AMD. Release dates differ: Intel launched in September 2014, AMD in May 2015. AMD's predecessor is Solar System and successor is Polaris Mobile; Intel's predecessor and successor are not recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records exactly two head-to-head benchmark comparisons, and each GPU claims one victory. The AMD Radeon R7 M365X wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5939, defeating the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200's 4556. The delta is 23.3% in AMD's favor. This is the larger absolute margin in the pairing, a gap of 1383 points. The AMD part's GCN architecture, designed for compute workloads, shows its strength here. The OpenCL result aligns with AMD's higher dedicated memory bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s and its 8 ROPs, which may help in certain memory-bound compute patterns.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 6032, beating AMD's 4893. The delta is again 23.3%, but this time in Intel's favor, a gap of 1139 points. Intel's Vulkan score is notably higher than its OpenCL score, suggesting the driver and architecture handle Vulkan's explicit API model better. Intel's 48 TMUs and 844.8 GFLOPS FP32 throughput likely drive this advantage in graphics-centric Vulkan tasks. The Intel part's Vulkan score of 6032 also exceeds AMD's best result in either test, which is 5939 in OpenCL.

The average benchmark scores reflect a split decision overall. Intel's 6117 average is higher than AMD's 5416, giving Intel an edge in the aggregate metric. However, the head-to-head results show a balanced matchup: each GPU wins one test by the same 23.3% margin. The percentile rankings reinforce this: Intel sits at 35 versus AMD's 32, a narrow gap that places both in the lower-middle range of the database.

The nearest rival data adds context. Intel's 6117 average is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon HD 8690M at 6137 (0.3% difference), and it edges out the NVIDIA RTX A400 (6078), GeForce MX230 (6077), and Quadro P2000 (6049) by less than 1.1%. AMD's 5416 average is similarly clustered around the AMD Radeon 610M (5444), Intel UHD Graphics P630 (5370), NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (5467), and AMD Radeon R7 M445 (5358), with deltas within 1.1% in either direction. These tight groupings indicate that both GPUs perform in a crowded field of entry-level mobile graphics solutions.