AMD Radeon RX 6400 vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6400 and the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 represent two vastly different eras and performance classes in the GPU landscape. The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark comparison, and the results are decisive: the RX 6400 delivers a score of 32,011 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 manages 5,712. This represents a 460.4% advantage for the AMD part, indicating a performance gap that is not merely incremental but generational. The RX 6400 sits in the 35th percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel solution is in the 33rd percentile, but this similarity in percentile ranking belies the massive gulf in absolute compute capability shown in the benchmark data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it illustrates a complete dominance by the AMD Radeon RX 6400. With a score of 32,011 against the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300's 5,712, the AMD part is 460.4% faster. This is not a close contest; it is a multi-generational leap in compute throughput. The RX 6400's score places it among the 35th percentile of all GPUs, whereas the Intel P6300's score places it in the 33rd percentile. While the percentile difference is small, the raw score difference is enormous, showing that the AMD part is far more capable of handling demanding compute workloads.

The benchmark results indicate that the RX 6400's closest rivals, based on average benchmark scores, are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server, with delta percentages of 0.0% and 0.1% respectively. This suggests that in a broader context, the RX 6400 competes with a specific tier of mobile and workstation graphics solutions. Conversely, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX, which is 0.1% faster, and the AMD Radeon HD 8790M, which is 0.4% slower. The data shows that the Intel part's performance is roughly equivalent to a mid-range discrete GPU from several generations prior.

The disparity in the head-to-head test is reflected in the raw specifications. The RX 6400 has a boost clock of 2321 MHz, while the Intel P6300 has a boost clock of 800 MHz. In terms of raw throughput, the RX 6400 achieves 3.565 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel part achieves 614.4 GFLOPS. The AMD part also boasts a peak pixel rate of 74.27 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 111.4 GTexel/s, compared to the Intel's 4.800 GPixel/s and 38.40 GTexel/s. These numbers confirm that the 460.4% lead in the OpenCL benchmark is consistent across various aspects of graphical and compute performance.

The Verdict

From the data, the choice is unambiguous for any workload that can utilize the GPU's compute capabilities. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is the superior product in every measurable way presented in the benchmark results. Its 460.4% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL test is a definitive statement of its performance advantage. The RX 6400 is a discrete, single-slot card with dedicated GDDR6 memory, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) that uses system shared memory. This architectural difference alone explains the massive gap in performance.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is an end-of-life product from the Broadwell generation, released in 2014, and its performance is firmly in the entry-level segment. Its nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX and the AMD Radeon HD 8790M, are also older, low-end mobile parts. The RX 6400, despite being end-of-life as well, is a much more recent product from the RDNA 2.0 architecture and targets a higher performance tier. Users who require any level of modern gaming or GPU-accelerated compute should consider the AMD Radeon RX 6400. The Intel part is only suitable for basic display output and tasks that do not require significant 3D rendering or compute performance. The verdict is clear: the AMD Radeon RX 6400 is the only viable option for performance-oriented tasks based on the provided data.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process technologies. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is based on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 6 nm process node. It features the Navi 24 chip, which contains 5,400 million transistors on a 107 mm² die. In contrast, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 uses the Generation 8.0 architecture, built on Intel's 14 nm process node, with the Broadwell GT3e chip. The transistor count and die size for the Intel part are not listed, but the process node difference is significant, with the 6 nm node offering a substantial density advantage.

The memory subsystems are entirely different. The RX 6400 has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 128.0 GB/s. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 uses "System Shared" memory, meaning it relies on the main system RAM, and its bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent." This is a critical distinction, as dedicated VRAM is significantly faster and does not contend with the CPU for memory bandwidth.

The compute configurations also differ greatly. The RX 6400 has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 ROPs. It also includes 12 ray tracing cores. The Intel P6300 has 384 shading units, 48 TMUs, and only 6 ROPs. The RX 6400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0. The feature set of the RX 6400 is much more modern, supporting hardware ray tracing and the latest API features.

Power requirements and physical specifications also highlight the divide. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 has a TDP of 53 W and is a single-slot card that draws power from the PCIe slot, with no external power connectors required. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is an integrated graphics processor with a TDP of 15 W, which is part of the CPU package. The RX 6400 uses a PCIe 4.0 x4 bus interface, while the Intel IGP relies on a Ring Bus connection. The display outputs for the Intel part are "Motherboard Dependent," whereas the RX 6400 has a dedicated 1x HDMI 2.1 and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon RX 6400 than the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 scores 32,011, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 scores 5,712. This gives the RX 6400 a 460.4% performance advantage.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between these two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory with a 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 uses System Shared memory, with bandwidth listed as System Dependent.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 has a boost clock of 2321 MHz. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 has a significantly lower boost clock of 800 MHz.

Q: Do these GPUs support different versions of DirectX?

A: Yes. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 supports DirectX 12 (11_1).

Q: What is the process node for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is manufactured on a 6 nm process node by TSMC. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is manufactured on Intel's 14 nm process node.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 has 768 shading units, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 has 384 shading units.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6400 wins in every category where data is available. Its primary advantage lies in compute-intensive tasks, as demonstrated by its 460.4% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark. This makes it the clear choice for any application that leverages GPU compute, such as video encoding, rendering, or data processing. Its dedicated 4 GB of GDDR6 memory with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth provides a significant advantage over the system-shared memory of the Intel part, ensuring that memory-intensive workloads are not bottlenecked by the CPU's memory controller. The RX 6400's higher pixel rate of 74.27 GPixel/s and texture rate of 111.4 GTexel/s also make it more suitable for gaming at higher resolutions and detail settings.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 has no benchmark wins in the provided data. Its only potential advantage is its 15 W TDP, which is significantly lower than the RX 6400's 53 W TDP. This makes it suitable for ultra-low-power systems where battery life is paramount and performance is not a priority. As an integrated GPU, it also requires no additional space in a chassis, unlike the discrete single-slot RX 6400. However, for any task that requires graphical performance, the data shows the Intel part is severely outclassed. The RX 6400 is the winner for gaming, content creation, and any GPU-accelerated workload, while the Intel P6300 is only acceptable for basic desktop tasks and power-constrained environments.