GPU Comparison

Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 and Intel UHD Graphics P630 represent two distinct eras of Intel integrated graphics, separated by six years of architectural evolution. The data shows a surprising twist: the older Broadwell-based Iris Pro P6300 actually outperforms the newer Comet Lake-based UHD P630 in the only head-to-head benchmark available, despite the latter having a much higher boost clock and newer API support. This analysis explores the benchmark results, architectural differences, and what these numbers mean for potential users.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it delivers a clear verdict. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 scores 5712, while the Intel UHD Graphics P630 manages 5111. That is an 11.8% advantage for the older Iris Pro part. This is a significant margin for integrated graphics, where differences of a few percentage points are more common.

Looking at the broader context, the Iris Pro P6300 sits at the 33rd percentile of all GPUs, while the UHD P630 sits at the 31st percentile. Both are firmly in entry-level territory, but the Iris Pro holds a slight edge in overall positioning. The nearest rivals for the Iris Pro P6300 include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX (scoring 5721, just 0.1% higher) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti (scoring 5731, 0.3% higher). This places the Iris Pro P6300 within striking distance of dedicated entry-level discrete GPUs from the same era.

The UHD P630's nearest rivals tell a similar story, but with lower absolute numbers. The AMD Radeon R7 M445 scores 5358, which is 0.2% lower than the UHD P630, while the AMD Radeon R7 M365X scores 5416, putting it 0.8% ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce 840M and GeForce 930A score 5322 and 5317 respectively, both within 1% of the UHD P630. This suggests the UHD P630 competes with a slightly lower tier of discrete mobile GPUs than the Iris Pro P6300 does.

The win count is decisive: the Iris Pro P6300 takes 1 win, the UHD P630 takes 0. However, the UHD P630 does have a second benchmark result, a Geekbench Vulkan score of 5628, which is actually higher than its OpenCL score. This hints at better modern API performance, even if the raw compute throughput is lower.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Iris Pro P6300 is built on the Broadwell GT3e chip, using Intel's Generation 8.0 architecture on a 14 nm process node. The UHD P630, by contrast, uses the Comet Lake GT2 chip with Generation 9.5 architecture on a 14 nm+++ node. The triple-plus node refinement suggests Intel squeezed more clock headroom from the same base process.

Clock speeds tell a fascinating story. The Iris Pro P6300 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 800 MHz. The UHD P630 starts at 350 MHz base but boosts all the way to 1200 MHz, a 50% higher peak clock. Yet despite this clock advantage, the UHD P630 still loses in raw compute performance. The reason becomes clear when examining the execution resources.

The Iris Pro P6300 packs 384 shading units, 48 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 6 render output units (ROPs). The UHD P630 has exactly half of each: 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 3 ROPs. This explains the performance gap despite the clock speed disadvantage. The Iris Pro can process twice as many pixels and textures per clock cycle, and while its lower clocks reduce that advantage, they do not eliminate it.

The compute rates confirm this. The Iris Pro P6300 delivers 4.800 GPixel/s pixel rate and 38.40 GTexel/s texture rate, with 614.4 GFLOPS of FP32 compute. The UHD P630 manages 3.600 GPixel/s, 28.80 GTexel/s, and 460.8 GFLOPS FP32. In every throughput metric, the Iris Pro wins by roughly 25-33%. Interestingly, the UHD P630 does list FP16 performance at 921.6 GFLOPS (2:1 ratio), which the Iris Pro does not specify, a sign of newer shader capabilities.

Memory is identical in configuration: both use System Shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. Both are IGP form factors with Ring Bus interfaces and motherboard-dependent display outputs. Both carry a 15 W TDP, making them equivalent in power envelope despite their different architectures.

Where Each One Wins

The Iris Pro P6300 wins in raw compute throughput. Its higher shader count and TMU/ROP configuration make it the stronger choice for any workload that relies on parallel pixel or texture processing. The 11.8% OpenCL lead demonstrates this clearly. For legacy applications, older games, or compute tasks that predate modern API optimizations, the Iris Pro P6300 is the better performer.

The UHD P630 wins in API modernity. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1) versus the Iris Pro's DirectX 12 (11_1), a full feature level higher. OpenGL support jumps from 4.4 to 4.6, and Vulkan support goes from 1.0 to 1.3. The UHD P630 also has a much higher boost clock at 1200 MHz versus 800 MHz, which helps in lightly-threaded or latency-sensitive workloads where clock speed matters more than raw throughput.

The Vulkan score of 5628 for the UHD P630 is notable. It exceeds the Iris Pro's OpenCL score of 5712 by only 84 points, suggesting that when the UHD P630 can leverage a modern API, it approaches the older GPU's performance. This indicates that the architectural improvements in Generation 9.5 partially compensate for the halved execution resources.

In practical terms, the Iris Pro P6300 suits users running older software that was optimized for DirectX 11 or earlier, where its raw compute power shines. The UHD P630 suits users running modern Vulkan-based applications or requiring newer API feature sets, even if peak throughput is lower.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 scores 5712 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 11.8% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics P630's 5111 in the same test.

Q: Does the newer UHD P630 have more shading units?

A: No. The Iris Pro P6300 has 384 shading units, while the UHD P630 has only 192, exactly half. The same halving applies to texture mapping units (48 vs 24) and render output units (6 vs 3).

Q: How do clock speeds compare?

A: The Iris Pro P6300 has a 300 MHz base and 800 MHz boost. The UHD P630 has a 350 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost, giving it a 50% higher peak clock.

Q: Which GPU has better API support?

A: The UHD P630 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The Iris Pro P6300 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0.

Q: Are both GPUs end-of-life?

A: Yes, both are listed as end-of-life production status. The Iris Pro P6300 was released in September 2014, and the UHD P630 was released in May 2020.

Q: Do they have the same memory configuration?

A: Yes, both use System Shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. Neither has dedicated VRAM.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a counterintuitive conclusion: the older GPU is the faster one. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 11.8%, and its compute rates are consistently higher across every metric. Its 384 shading units simply outmuscle the UHD P630's 192, despite the latter's 1200 MHz boost clock.

However, the UHD P630 is not without merit. Its Vulkan score of 5628 shows that modern API support can narrow the gap significantly. For users running current software that leverages Vulkan 1.3 or DirectX 12_1 features, the UHD P630 may deliver a comparable experience despite lower theoretical throughput. Its OpenGL 4.6 support also makes it the better choice for workstation applications that require newer GL features.

The choice depends on workload priorities. Users with legacy applications, older games, or compute tasks that scale with shader count should prefer the Iris Pro P6300. Its 38.40 GTexel/s texture rate and 614.4 GFLOPS FP32 performance provide tangible benefits that clocks alone cannot match. Users running modern Vulkan titles or requiring the latest API feature levels should consider the UHD P630, accepting lower peak performance for better software compatibility.

Both GPUs occupy the same power envelope at 15 W TDP, and both rely on system memory, so there is no power or bandwidth advantage for either. The Iris Pro P6300's percentile ranking of 33rd versus the UHD P630's 31st reinforces that the older part is slightly better positioned overall. For pure performance, the data says Iris Pro P6300. For software modernity, the UHD P630 has the edge.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 | Intel UHD Graphics P630 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Broadwell GT3e | Comet Lake GT2 |

| Architecture | Generation 8.0 | Generation 9.5 |

| Generation | HD Graphics-W (Broadwell) | HD Graphics-W (Comet Lake) |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 14 nm+++ |

| Base Clock | 300 MHz | 350 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 800 MHz | 1200 MHz |

| Shading Units | 384 | 192 |

| Texture Mapping Units | 48 | 24 |

| Render Output Units | 6 | 3 |

| Pixel Rate | 4.800 GPixel/s | 3.600 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 38.40 GTexel/s | 28.80 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 614.4 GFLOPS | 460.8 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | Not specified | 921.6 GFLOPS (2:1) |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |

| OpenGL Support | 4.4 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan Support | 1.0 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | September 4, 2014 | May 12, 2020 |

| Geekbench OpenCL Score | 5712 | 5111 |

| Geekbench Vulkan Score | Not available | 5628 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 33 | 31 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 5712 | 5370 |