AMD Radeon RX 6400 vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 Comparison

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 and the AMD Radeon RX 6400 represent two vastly different eras of GPU design. The Iris Pro is a 2014 integrated solution from Intel, while the RX 6400 is a 2022 discrete card from AMD. The benchmark data shows a clear hierarchy, but the story is more nuanced than a simple victory lap for the newer card. This analysis breaks down where each chip makes sense, based strictly on the performance metrics and specifications provided.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is the undisputed performance champion in every head-to-head comparison available. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 6400 scores 32,011 compared to the Iris Pro’s 4,556, a massive 85.8% gap. Similarly, in Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6400’s 16,372 score dwarfs the Iris Pro’s 6,032, representing a 63.2% lead. The RX 6400 also has a significantly higher average benchmark score of 6,001 across its suite of tests, which includes Passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, as well as G2D, G3D, and GPU compute tests. Its Passmark G3D score alone is 7,673, which is higher than the Iris Pro’s average of 6,117 across all its tests. For any workload that relies on raw compute, rasterization, or modern API support, the RX 6400 wins decisively.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200, however, has a clear, albeit narrow, advantage in one specific area: its average benchmark score relative to its nearest rivals. The data shows the Iris Pro sits at the 35th percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 6,117. Its closest rival, the AMD Radeon HD 8690M, scores 6,137, putting the Iris Pro just 0.3% behind. It is also 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A400 and 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce MX230. In contrast, the RX 6400, also at the 35th percentile, is virtually tied with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (0% delta) and is only 0.1% ahead of the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server. This suggests that while the RX 6400 is far faster than the Iris Pro, its performance class is crowded, whereas the Iris Pro is a more unique performer in its immediate tier. For a system where the GPU is an integrated component and the goal is to match or slightly exceed older discrete mobile parts, the Iris Pro holds its own.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two is vast. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is built on Intel’s Generation 8.0 architecture, specifically the Broadwell GT3e chip. It uses a 14 nm process node from Intel’s own foundry. Its memory subsystem is entirely "System Shared," meaning it has no dedicated VRAM and relies on the system’s main memory, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." This is a fundamental limitation for gaming and graphics workloads. Its feature set is also a generation behind, supporting DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0. The GPU is a small part of a larger package, with a TDP of just 15 W, and it connects to the rest of the system via a Ring Bus interface.

The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is a completely different beast. It is based on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, using the Navi 24 chip, and is manufactured on TSMC’s 6 nm process node. It has a dedicated 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a critical difference; the RX 6400 has its own high-speed memory, while the Iris Pro is constrained by system memory. The RX 6400 is a discrete card with 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, compared to the Iris Pro’s 384 shading units, 48 TMUs, and only 6 ROPs. The RX 6400 also includes 12 dedicated ray tracing cores. Its API support is modern, with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The transistor count is a stark indicator of complexity: the RX 6400 has 5,400 million transistors on a 107 mm² die, while the Iris Pro’s transistor count is not listed. The RX 6400’s TDP is 53 W, more than triple the Iris Pro’s 15 W.

The Verdict

From the data, the choice is clear for almost any use case. If you need to run any modern game, 3D application, or compute-intensive task, the AMD Radeon RX 6400 is the only logical choice. Its lead in OpenCL and Vulkan is so substantial that it is not a close contest. The RX 6400’s dedicated 4 GB of GDDR6 memory with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth provides a foundation that the Intel Iris Pro simply cannot match with its system-dependent shared memory. The RX 6400 also offers modern features like ray tracing, which the Iris Pro lacks entirely.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 only makes sense in a very specific scenario: you are building or upgrading a legacy system and require a GPU with a 15 W TDP that slots directly into an existing motherboard with no power connectors. Its performance, while low in absolute terms, is competitive with other entry-level mobile and desktop parts from its era, as shown by its near-ties with the HD 8690M and MX230. It is a capable integrated solution for basic desktop tasks, video playback, and very light gaming. However, for any new build or any user with a performance need, the RX 6400 is the definitive winner. Even the RX 6400’s launch MSRP of 159 USD is a data point that reflects its position as a budget discrete option, but its performance is in an entirely different league than the IGP.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is dramatically faster. It scores 32,011 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores only 4,556, leaving the Iris Pro 85.8% behind.

Q: Does either GPU support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, the AMD Radeon RX 6400 has 12 dedicated ray tracing cores. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has no ray tracing cores listed in its specifications.

Q: How do the memory bandwidths compare?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 has a dedicated 128.0 GB/s bandwidth from its 4 GB GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has "System Shared" memory with "System Dependent" bandwidth, meaning it shares system RAM and its performance is not fixed.

Q: What is the difference in their power consumption?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has a TDP of 15 W, making it suitable for integrated use without extra power connectors. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 has a TDP of 53 W and also requires no power connectors, but it is a discrete card.

Q: Which GPU supports more modern graphics APIs?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is far more modern, supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0.

Q: How does the performance of the Iris Pro compare to the RX 6400 in Vulkan?

A: The RX 6400 is the winner by a wide margin. It scores 16,372 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the Iris Pro scores 6,032, a 63.2% difference in favor of the AMD card.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison data is limited to two tests, but both tell the same story with overwhelming clarity. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon RX 6400 scores 32,011. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 4,556. The delta is -85.8%, meaning the Iris Pro is performing at a fraction of the RX 6400’s level. This test measures general-purpose compute performance, and the RX 6400’s dedicated memory and newer architecture give it a colossal advantage.

The second test, Geekbench Vulkan, shows a similar result. The RX 6400 scores 16,372, while the Iris Pro scores 6,032. The delta here is -63.2%. Vulkan is a low-overhead graphics API, and the RX 6400’s support for Vulkan 1.4, compared to the Iris Pro’s 1.0, likely contributes to its substantial lead. While the Iris Pro’s score is not negligible, the RX 6400 is more than 2.7 times faster in this workload. These two benchmark results alone demonstrate that the RX 6400 is in a completely different performance class, and this is further reinforced by the RX 6400’s additional Passmark scores, which include a 7,673 in G3D and 2,812 in GPU compute, showing strong performance across legacy and modern DirectX versions.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for these two products highlight their generational and architectural divide. The most fundamental difference is in memory: the Intel Iris Pro uses "System Shared" memory with a "System Shared" bus width and "System Dependent" bandwidth, while the AMD Radeon RX 6400 has a dedicated 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The process node also differs significantly: the Intel chip is on Intel’s 14 nm process, while the AMD chip is on TSMC’s 6 nm process. The shading units are doubled on the RX 6400 (768 vs. 384), and the ROPs are more than five times higher (32 vs. 6). The RX 6400 also has 12 ray tracing cores, a feature completely absent from the Iris Pro. The clocks are vastly different, with the RX 6400 boosting to 2321 MHz versus the Iris Pro’s 1100 MHz boost. The FP32 performance is a key spec: the RX 6400 delivers 3.565 TFLOPS, while the Iris Pro manages only 844.8 GFLOPS. The TDP is higher on the RX 6400 at 53 W, but it is still a single-slot card with no power connectors, while the Iris Pro is an IGP with a 15 W TDP. Finally, the API support is more advanced on the RX 6400, which supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the Iris Pro is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.0. The RX 6400 also has a specified transistor count of 5,400 million on a 107 mm² die, whereas no such data is provided for the Iris Pro.