Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX130 Comparison

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 and the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 are both end-of-life mobile-class graphics solutions, but they represent very different design philosophies and eras. The Iris Pro is an integrated processor graphics unit from Intel’s Broadwell generation, while the MX130 is a discrete entry-level part from NVIDIA’s Maxwell family. Benchmark data shows a clear, though not overwhelming, performance advantage for the NVIDIA part in the single available compute test, but the architectural and specification gaps tell a more nuanced story about suitability for different tasks.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the available benchmark data, the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 is the faster GPU. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the MX130 scores 6102, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 scores 5712, a delta of -6.4% for the Intel part. This makes the MX130 the winner in the sole head-to-head benchmark available, giving it a 1-0 record in wins.

The data suggests the MX130 is the better choice for users prioritizing raw compute performance in modern applications. Its 913.2 GFLOPS of FP32 throughput is significantly higher than the Iris Pro’s 614.4 GFLOPS, and it also boasts a higher pixel rate of 9.512 GPixel/s compared to 4.800 GPixel/s. However, the Iris Pro is not without merit. Its texture rate of 38.40 GTexel/s is actually higher than the MX130’s 28.54 GTexel/s, suggesting it may handle texture-heavy workloads better. Furthermore, the Iris Pro holds a slight edge in the percentile ranking, sitting at the 33rd percentile versus the MX130’s 32nd percentile, indicating it beats a marginally larger share of all GPUs in the database.

The verdict is straightforward: if you need the best raw compute performance, the MX130 is the pick. If you are working within the constraints of an integrated solution and prioritize texture throughput, the Iris Pro is a respectable, lower-power alternative. The MX130 is also newer, released in late 2017 versus the Iris Pro’s 2014 debut, which explains its support for newer API versions like OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX130 is faster, scoring 6102 points compared to the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300’s 5712 points, a 6.4% difference.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The MX130 has a dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory pool with a 64-bit bus and 40.10 GB/s of bandwidth. The Iris Pro, in contrast, uses System Shared memory, with the bus width, type, and bandwidth all listed as system-dependent.

Q: What are the major API support differences?

A: The Intel Iris Pro supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0. The NVIDIA MX130 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, giving it a notable advantage in OpenGL and Vulkan versions.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The NVIDIA MX130 has a higher pixel rate at 9.512 GPixel/s, nearly double the Intel Iris Pro’s 4.800 GPixel/s.

Q: Which GPU has a higher texture fill rate?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 has a higher texture rate at 38.40 GTexel/s, compared to the NVIDIA MX130’s 28.54 GTexel/s.

Q: How does the power consumption differ?

A: The Intel Iris Pro has a significantly lower TDP of 15 W, while the NVIDIA MX130 has a TDP of 30 W.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is based on the Generation 8.0 architecture, using the Broadwell GT3e chip on a 14 nm process manufactured by Intel. It features 384 shading units, 48 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 6 render output units (ROPs). Its memory subsystem is entirely system-shared, with no dedicated VRAM.

In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 is built on the Maxwell architecture, using the GM108S chip fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It has 384 shading units, but only 24 TMUs and 8 ROPs. The MX130’s key architectural advantage is its discrete memory interface, featuring 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus. The MX130 also has a higher transistor count at 1,020 million, compared to the unspecified transistor count of the Intel part, and a die size of 77 mm². The process node difference is stark: Intel’s 14 nm is significantly more advanced than NVIDIA’s 28 nm, which helps explain the Iris Pro’s lower power consumption despite being an older design.

The bus interface also differs, with the Iris Pro using a Ring Bus and the MX130 using PCIe 3.0 x4. The MX130 supports more modern API versions, including OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, while the Iris Pro is limited to OpenGL 4.4 and Vulkan 1.0. Both support DirectX 12, though the Iris Pro’s implementation is at feature level 11_1, while the MX130 is at 11_0.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal several key differences between the two GPUs. The most obvious is the process node: the Intel Iris Pro uses a 14 nm process, while the NVIDIA MX130 uses a 28 nm process. This is reflected in their TDPs, with the Iris Pro drawing only 15 W compared to the MX130’s 30 W. The clock speeds also differ substantially; the Iris Pro has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 800 MHz, while the MX130 runs at a base of 1109 MHz and boosts to 1189 MHz.

The memory configurations are entirely different. The Iris Pro relies on System Shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, whereas the MX130 has a dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 pool with a 64-bit bus and 40.10 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock differs as well, with the MX130 operating at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

The compute resources are partially shared: both GPUs have 384 shading units. However, the Intel part has 48 TMUs and 6 ROPs, while the NVIDIA part has 24 TMUs and 8 ROPs. This leads to different fill rate characteristics, as noted earlier. The FP32 performance is also different, with the MX130 delivering 913.2 GFLOPS versus the Iris Pro’s 614.4 GFLOPS.

The API support is another differentiator. The Iris Pro supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0, while the MX130 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The bus interface differs, with the Iris Pro using a Ring Bus and the MX130 using PCIe 3.0 x4. Finally, the display outputs are dependent on the motherboard for the Iris Pro and the portable device for the MX130.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 emerges victorious. The MX130 scores 6102 points, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 scores 5712 points. This represents a 6.4% performance advantage for the NVIDIA part, which is a meaningful gap in compute workloads that leverage OpenCL.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database helps contextualize these scores. The Iris Pro’s score of 5712 places it in close competition with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX, which scores 5721 (a -0.1% difference), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti, which scores 5731 (a -0.3% difference). It also edges out the AMD Radeon HD 8790M, which scores 5691 (a 0.4% difference), and the NVIDIA Quadro M500M, which scores 5604 (a 1.9% difference). This suggests the Iris Pro is competitive with mid-range discrete GPUs from several generations ago.

The MX130’s score of 6102 places it in a slightly different performance tier. It is closely matched with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M, which scores 5501 (a 0.1% difference), and the AMD Radeon R7 M440, which scores 5483 (a 0.5% difference). It also outperforms the AMD FirePro M4000, which scores 5537 (a -0.5% difference), and the NVIDIA Quadro M4000, which scores 5467 (a 0.7% difference). This indicates the MX130 sits in a similar performance class to older mid-range mobile GPUs.

The data shows that while the MX130 wins the head-to-head compute test, the Iris Pro is not far behind and even offers a higher texture rate. The MX130’s victory is driven by its higher clock speeds and dedicated GDDR5 memory, which provide substantial bandwidth advantages. However, the Iris Pro’s higher TMU count and lower power consumption make it a compelling option for specific workloads and form factors where power efficiency is paramount. In the context of their respective release dates, the MX130’s performance advantage is consistent with its newer architecture and discrete memory design, even though the Iris Pro benefits from a more advanced manufacturing process.