Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear split between these two mobile graphics solutions, with each taking one benchmark category by a decisive margin. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M scores 9230, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 manages 4556. That represents a 102.6% advantage for the NVIDIA part, meaning it delivers more than double the compute performance in this particular workload. The OpenCL result is the strongest single data point for the GTX 680M in this comparison, and it aligns with the expected gap between a dedicated discrete GPU and an integrated processor graphics solution.

The Geekbench Metal test flips the outcome entirely. Here, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 7764, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M trails at 4815. The delta is 38% in favor of Intel. This is a substantial reversal, and it suggests that the two architectures handle API-level workloads very differently. The Iris Pro part is significantly ahead in Metal, which is a modern low-level graphics API, while the older Kepler-based NVIDIA chip dominates in OpenCL, a more general-purpose compute interface. The head-to-head record is one win apiece, so neither product can claim overall superiority based purely on benchmark totals.

Looking at average benchmark scores across the full recorded set, the GTX 680M posts 7023 versus 6117 for the Iris Pro 6200. That is a 14.8% gap in favor of NVIDIA when both available results are averaged together. However, the average is heavily influenced by the OpenCL result, where the NVIDIA part's score is nearly double Intel's. The Metal score pulls in the opposite direction, but not by enough to close the overall gap. The percentile placement reinforces this: the GTX 680M sits at the 39th percentile among all GPUs, while the Iris Pro 6200 sits at the 35th percentile. Both are near the mid-range of the database, but the NVIDIA part holds a modest edge in overall standing.

The nearest rival data provides additional context. The GTX 680M's closest competitor, the NVIDIA T600, scores 7035, which is 0.2% higher than the 680M's average. The AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6975, trailing by 0.7%. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M is 1.1% behind at 6946, and the GeForce GTX 970 is 1.9% ahead at 7157. These are very tight margins, indicating that the GTX 680M performs within a narrow band of several other mid-range GPUs from its era. For the Iris Pro 6200, the AMD Radeon HD 8690M scores 6137, just 0.3% higher, while the NVIDIA RTX A400 is 0.6% behind at 6078, and the GeForce MX230 is 0.7% behind at 6077. The Quadro P2000 trails by 1.1% at 6049. The Iris Pro's nearest rivals are similarly clustered, reinforcing its mid-range positioning.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M scores 9230 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 4556. The NVIDIA part leads by 102.6%, more than doubling the Intel result.

Q: Which GPU wins the Metal benchmark?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 7764 in Geekbench Metal, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M scores 4815. Intel leads by 38% in this test.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M has an average benchmark score of 7023 across its recorded tests. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has an average of 6117. The difference is 906 points, or about 14.8% in favor of NVIDIA.

Q: How do these GPUs rank against all other GPUs in the database?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M sits at the 39th percentile among all GPUs. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 sits at the 35th percentile. Both are mid-range performers, with NVIDIA holding a slight overall edge.

Q: What are the closest rivals for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M?

A: The nearest rival is the NVIDIA T600 with an average score of 7035, which is 0.2% higher. The AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6975, 0.7% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M scores 6946, 1.1% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 scores 7157, 1.9% higher.

Q: What are the closest rivals for the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200?

A: The nearest rival is the AMD Radeon HD 8690M with an average score of 6137, which is 0.3% higher. The NVIDIA RTX A400 scores 6078, 0.6% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce MX230 scores 6077, 0.7% lower. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 6049, 1.1% lower.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M is built on the GK104 chip using the Kepler architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 3,540 million transistors on a die size of 294 mm², producing a transistor density of 12.0 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 uses the Broadwell GT3e chip with Generation 8.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at Intel. The database does not record transistor count, die size, or density for the Intel part, so a direct comparison on those metrics is not possible. The process node difference, however, is clear: 28 nm for NVIDIA versus 14 nm for Intel, with Intel using a smaller manufacturing process.

The clock speeds differ substantially. The GTX 680M has a base clock of 719 MHz and a boost clock of 758 MHz. The Iris Pro 6200 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz. Intel's part starts much lower but boosts to a significantly higher maximum frequency. Memory configurations also diverge: the GTX 680M uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Iris Pro 6200 uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth, meaning it relies on the host system's memory rather than dedicated VRAM.

The compute units show a large difference in raw counts. The GTX 680M has 1,344 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The Iris Pro 6200 has 384 shading units, 48 TMUs, and only 6 ROPs. Despite the lower unit counts, Intel's part achieves higher boost clocks, which helps narrow the gap in some workloads. The pixel rate for the GTX 680M is 21.22 GPixel/s, while the Iris Pro 6200 manages 6.600 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 84.90 GTexel/s for NVIDIA versus 52.80 GTexel/s for Intel. Floating point performance, measured as FP32, is 2.038 TFLOPS for the GTX 680M and 844.8 GFLOPS for the Iris Pro 6200.

Power consumption is another major differentiator. The GTX 680M carries a 100 W TDP and uses an MXM module slot width with no power connectors. The Iris Pro 6200 has a 15 W TDP and is an integrated graphics processor, or IGP, with a Ring Bus interface. This makes the Intel part far more power-efficient on paper, though its performance ceiling is correspondingly lower in most compute scenarios. The GTX 680M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The Iris Pro 6200 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0. NVIDIA's API support is more recent across the board, with higher OpenGL and Vulkan versions.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M is the stronger overall compute GPU, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has a specific advantage in Metal workloads. The average benchmark scores favor NVIDIA by about 15%, and the OpenCL result shows a massive 102.6% lead for the discrete part. The GTX 680M also holds the higher percentile rank at 39 versus 35. Users who prioritize general-purpose compute performance, OpenCL acceleration, or raw FP32 throughput should select the NVIDIA part. Its 2.038 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is more than double the 844.8 GFLOPS of the Intel integrated solution.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200, however, wins the Metal benchmark by 38%, which is a substantial margin. For workloads that rely specifically on the Metal API, the Iris Pro 6200 is the better choice. Its higher boost clock of 1100 MHz, combined with its Generation 8.0 architecture, evidently maps well to Metal workloads despite having far fewer shading units. The 15 W TDP also makes it far more suitable for thin-and-light portable systems where power draw is a constraint. The GTX 680M's 100 W TDP requires a larger chassis and more robust cooling.

Both products are end-of-life, so neither represents a future-proof investment. The GTX 680M was released in June 2012, while the Iris Pro 6200 followed in September 2014. The NVIDIA part belongs to the GeForce 600M generation with a Kepler architecture, while Intel's part belongs to the HD Graphics (Broadwell) generation with Generation 8.0 architecture. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP in the database, so no price comparison is possible from the available data.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The GTX 680M uses a 28 nm TSMC process with 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The Iris Pro 6200 uses a 14 nm Intel process with no recorded transistor count or die size. Clock speeds: the GTX 680M runs at 719 MHz base and 758 MHz boost, while the Iris Pro 6200 runs at 300 MHz base and 1100 MHz boost. Memory: the GTX 680M has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Iris Pro 6200 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Shading units: 1,344 for NVIDIA versus 384 for Intel. TMUs: 112 versus 48. ROPs: 32 versus 6. Pixel rate: 21.22 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 84.90 GTexel/s versus 52.80 GTexel/s. FP32: 2.038 TFLOPS versus 844.8 GFLOPS. TDP: 100 W versus 15 W. Slot width: MXM Module versus IGP. Power connectors: none for either, but the NVIDIA part is an MXM module while Intel is integrated. Bus interface: MXM-B (3.0) versus Ring Bus. Display outputs: portable device dependent versus motherboard dependent. DirectX: 12 (11_0) versus 12 (11_1). OpenGL: 4.6 versus 4.4. Vulkan: 1.2.175 versus 1.0.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M wins in OpenCL compute performance, with a 102.6% lead over the Iris Pro 6200. It also has a higher average benchmark score at 7023 versus 6117, a higher FP32 throughput at 2.038 TFLOPS versus 844.8 GFLOPS, and a higher pixel rate at 21.22 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s. The texture rate is also higher at 84.90 GTexel/s versus 52.80 GTexel/s. The GTX 680M's dedicated 4 GB GDDR5 memory with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth provides a clear advantage over system shared memory, which is dependent on the host platform. For GPU-accelerated compute tasks, rendering workloads that rely on OpenCL, or applications that need high memory bandwidth, the GTX 680M is the superior option.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 wins in the Metal benchmark, scoring 7764 versus 4815, a 38% advantage. Its higher boost clock of 1100 MHz, nearly 45% higher than the GTX 680M's 758 MHz boost, likely contributes to this result. The Iris Pro 6200 also has a significantly lower TDP at 15 W versus 100 W, making it the only viable choice for ultra-portable systems with limited cooling and battery capacity. Its DirectX 12 (11_1) support is slightly newer than the GTX 680M's 12 (11_0), though the NVIDIA part counters with newer OpenGL and Vulkan versions. For Metal-specific graphics workloads, integrated system designs, or power-constrained environments, the Iris Pro 6200 is the better fit.