AMD Radeon R7 M445 vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 Comparison

Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 and AMD Radeon R7 M445 represent two different approaches to mobile graphics, one integrated into the processor and one as a discrete part. The data available in the database provides a clear picture of their relative performance, though the comparison is limited by the available benchmark results.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct benchmark comparison between these two GPUs, and it is the Geekbench OpenCL test. This test measures general-purpose compute performance, which is relevant for tasks that offload work to the GPU beyond traditional rendering. In this specific test, the AMD Radeon R7 M445 scores 5358 points, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 4556 points. The delta between them is -15%, which means the AMD part is 15% ahead of the Intel part in this workload. The result is decisive, with the AMD Radeon R7 M445 taking the only win in the head-to-head comparison.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 does have additional benchmark results in the database. It records a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6032 and a Geekbench Metal score of 7764. These tests exercise different graphics APIs, with Vulkan being a cross-platform standard and Metal being Apple's proprietary API. The AMD Radeon R7 M445 has no corresponding Vulkan or Metal results recorded, so a direct comparison in those APIs cannot be made from the available data.

Looking at overall average benchmark scores, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 holds an average of 6117 across all its recorded tests. The AMD Radeon R7 M445 has an average of 5358, which is based solely on its single OpenCL result. This places the Intel part in the 35th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the AMD part sits in the 31st percentile. The difference in percentile rank is modest, indicating that both parts land in a similar performance tier overall.

The nearest rivals for each GPU help contextualize their positions. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 sits within 1.1% of the NVIDIA Quadro P2000, within 0.7% of the NVIDIA GeForce MX230, within 0.6% of the NVIDIA RTX A400, and within 0.3% of the AMD Radeon HD 8690M. These are all tight margins, showing that the Iris Pro part is clustered with a group of older and entry-level discrete GPUs. The AMD Radeon R7 M445 is within 0.9% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, within 0.8% of the NVIDIA GeForce 930A, within 0.7% of the NVIDIA GeForce 840M, and within 0.2% of the Intel UHD Graphics P630. The presence of the GTX 980M in this list is notable, but the delta is small enough that it does not suggest a meaningful performance advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data indicates a clear win for the AMD Radeon R7 M445 in OpenCL compute performance. This is the only head-to-head result available, and it shows the AMD part delivering 15% higher scores. For applications that rely heavily on OpenCL for general-purpose GPU compute, such as certain physics simulations, video processing effects, or data-parallel workloads, the AMD Radeon R7 M445 would be the better choice based on this measurement.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200, however, has a broader set of recorded benchmark results. Its Vulkan score of 6032 and Metal score of 7764 suggest capability in those API environments. Vulkan is increasingly used in games and applications that need low-level hardware access, while Metal is the standard for macOS and iOS devices. Since the AMD Radeon R7 M445 has no recorded scores for either API, the Intel part is the only one with demonstrated performance in those areas. This does not prove the Intel part is faster in Vulkan or Metal, but it does show that the Intel part has been tested and scored in those environments.

The average benchmark score comparison favors the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200, which sits at 6117 versus 5358 for the AMD part. This is a difference of roughly 14%, favoring Intel. However, this average includes three different tests for Intel and only one for AMD, so the comparison is not apples-to-apples. The Intel part's average is pulled up by its strong Metal score, which may not be representative of typical Windows-based workloads.

The process node difference also creates a separation. Intel uses a 14 nm process, while AMD uses a 28 nm process from TSMC. The smaller node typically allows for lower power consumption at equivalent performance, but the database does not provide TDP figures for the AMD part. The Intel part has a listed TDP of 15 W, which covers the entire processor, not just the graphics portion. The AMD part has no TDP listed, making a direct power comparison impossible from the recorded data.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the AMD Radeon R7 M445 as the stronger choice for OpenCL-based compute workloads. Its 15% lead in the direct Geekbench OpenCL comparison is the most concrete performance difference between the two. For users who know their applications rely on OpenCL, the AMD part offers a measurable advantage.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200, however, demonstrates a higher average benchmark score and has performance data in Vulkan and Metal. Its 35th percentile ranking versus the AMD part's 31st percentile suggests that, across a broader range of potential workloads, the Intel part may hold a slight edge. The high Metal score is particularly interesting, as it indicates strong performance in Apple's ecosystem. Anyone using macOS with this GPU would likely find it more capable than the AMD part, which has no recorded Metal results.

For gaming and general graphics workloads, the data is less conclusive. The only direct comparison is in OpenCL, which does not directly translate to gaming frame rates. Both parts are end-of-life products, with the Intel part released on September 4, 2014, and the AMD part released on May 14, 2016. The AMD part is newer by roughly a year and a half, which may explain its advantage in compute-oriented tasks.

The AMD Radeon R7 M445 also brings a dedicated memory configuration with 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 32.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 relies on system shared memory, with bandwidth that is system dependent. For workloads that are sensitive to memory bandwidth, the AMD part's dedicated GDDR5 could provide more consistent performance. The Intel part's memory performance would vary depending on the system's RAM configuration.

The verdict from the data is that the AMD Radeon R7 M445 wins in pure compute performance, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has a more versatile benchmark profile with higher peak scores in specific APIs. The choice between them depends on the target workload. For OpenCL-heavy tasks, choose AMD. For Vulkan or Metal compatibility, or for a higher average score, choose Intel.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M445 scores 5358, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 4556. The AMD part leads by 15% in this test.

Q: Does the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 have any benchmark results that the AMD Radeon R7 M445 lacks?

A: Yes. The Intel part has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6032 and a Geekbench Metal score of 7764. The AMD part has no recorded Vulkan or Metal results.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores between the two?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has an average score of 6117, while the AMD Radeon R7 M445 has an average of 5358. The Intel part scores higher on average, but this is based on three tests for Intel and only one for AMD.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in terms of overall GPU percentile ranking?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 sits in the 35th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon R7 M445 sits in the 31st percentile.

Q: Which GPU has dedicated memory?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M445 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus with 32.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: What are the release dates for these two GPUs?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 was released on September 4, 2014. The AMD Radeon R7 M445 was released on May 14, 2016.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural families. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is built on the Broadwell GT3e chip, using Intel's Generation 8.0 architecture. Its codename generation is listed as HD Graphics (Broadwell). The process node is 14 nm, manufactured by Intel's own foundry. The AMD Radeon R7 M445 is built on the Meso chip, using AMD's GCN 3.0 architecture. Its generation is listed as Gem System (R7 M400), and it is manufactured on a 28 nm process by TSMC. The AMD chip contains 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.4M per mm². No transistor count or die size is recorded for the Intel part.

The compute resources differ significantly. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has 384 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 6 render output units. The AMD Radeon R7 M445 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. Despite having fewer shading units, the AMD part achieves a higher pixel rate of 7.360 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s for Intel, due to its higher number of ROPs. The Intel part, however, has a much higher texture rate of 52.80 GTexel/s versus 18.40 GTexel/s for AMD, driven by its 48 TMUs. In raw floating-point performance, the Intel part delivers 844.8 GFLOPS, while the AMD part delivers 588.8 GFLOPS. The AMD part also lists FP16 performance at 588.8 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while no FP16 figure is recorded for the Intel part.

The clock speeds also differ. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz. The AMD Radeon R7 M445 has a base clock of 780 MHz and a boost clock of 920 MHz. The AMD part starts higher but boosts to a lower peak. The memory clock for AMD is 1000 MHz, or 4 Gbps effective, while the Intel part's memory clock is listed as system shared.

API support shows some differences. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0. The AMD part supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The AMD part has a newer DirectX feature level and a much newer Vulkan version. The bus interface also differs, with Intel using a Ring Bus and AMD using PCIe 3.0 x8.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across several specification fields. The process node is 14 nm for Intel and 28 nm for AMD. The Intel part is manufactured by Intel, while the AMD part is manufactured by TSMC. The AMD chip has 1,550 million transistors and a 125 mm² die size, while neither figure is recorded for Intel. The transistor density for AMD is 12.4M per mm², with no comparable figure for Intel.

Clock speeds differ as noted: Intel has a 300 MHz base and 1100 MHz boost, while AMD has a 780 MHz base and 920 MHz boost. Memory configuration is a major differentiator. Intel uses system shared memory with a system dependent bus width and bandwidth, while AMD has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus with 32.00 GB/s bandwidth.

The compute units differ: Intel has 384 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 6 ROPs, while AMD has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel rate is 6.600 GPixel/s for Intel and 7.360 GPixel/s for AMD. Texture rate is 52.80 GTexel/s for Intel and 18.40 GTexel/s for AMD. FP32 performance is 844.8 GFLOPS for Intel and 588.8 GFLOPS for AMD. FP16 performance is only recorded for AMD at 588.8 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio.

The TDP is listed as 15 W for Intel, while no TDP is recorded for AMD. Both are IGP slot width. The bus interface is Ring Bus for Intel and PCIe 3.0 x8 for AMD. Display outputs are motherboard dependent for Intel and portable device dependent for AMD. API support differs in DirectX version (12 (11_1) for Intel, 12 (12_0) for AMD), OpenGL version (4.4 for Intel, 4.6 for AMD), and Vulkan version (1.0 for Intel, 1.2.170 for AMD).

Release dates differ, with Intel on September 4, 2014, and AMD on May 14, 2016. The AMD part has a recorded predecessor called Solar System and a successor called Polaris Mobile, while no predecessor or successor is recorded for Intel. Both parts are listed as end-of-life. The AMD part has a recorded transistor count, die size, and transistor density, while the Intel part has none of these fields populated.