Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 vs Intel UHD Graphics 750 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel UHD Graphics 750 compare to the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 in OpenCL performance?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 6743 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 4556. This gives the UHD Graphics 750 a 48% advantage in that test.

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 750 has an average benchmark score of 7441, placing it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has an average score of 6117, putting it in the 35th percentile.

Q: What is the Vulkan performance difference between the two?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 8138 versus 6032 for the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200. That is a 34.9% lead for the newer part.

Q: Does the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 have more shading units?

A: Yes, the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has 384 shading units, while the UHD Graphics 750 has 256. Despite this, the UHD Graphics 750 still wins in both recorded benchmark tests.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds of these two GPUs?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 750 has a boost clock of 1300 MHz, whereas the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 boosts to 1100 MHz.

Q: Which GPU supports a higher DirectX version?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 750 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 supports DirectX 12 (11_1). The newer GPU also supports OpenGL 4.6 versus 4.4 and Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.0.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel UHD Graphics 750 wins both head-to-head tests against the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200. In Geekbench OpenCL, the newer part scores 6743 versus 4556, a 48% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan, the UHD Graphics 750 scores 8138 versus 6032, a 34.9% advantage.

Looking at the broader database, the UHD Graphics 750 sits at the 40th percentile of all GPUs with an average score of 7441. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447, 0.1% behind) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7472, 0.4% behind). The Iris Pro Graphics 6200, by contrast, sits at the 35th percentile with an average score of 6117, placing it near the AMD Radeon HD 8690M (6137, 0.3% ahead) and the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (6049, 1.1% behind).

For system builders and upgraders, the choice is clear: the Intel UHD Graphics 750 delivers consistently higher performance across every recorded workload. The Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is an end-of-life part from 2014, and while it offers more shading units and texture mapping units on paper, the recorded benchmark results show it cannot translate that hardware into superior real-world scores. Users seeking better integrated graphics performance should select the UHD Graphics 750, as the data indicates it is the stronger option in both OpenCL and Vulkan workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs were tested in two shared workloads: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The Intel UHD Graphics 750 won both, recording 2 wins against 0 for the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the UHD Graphics 750 scores 6743, which is 48% higher than the Iris Pro Graphics 6200's 4556. This is the largest relative gap between the two parts. The 48% delta means the newer integrated GPU delivers nearly half again as much compute throughput in this OpenCL test. To put that in context, the UHD Graphics 750's OpenCL result alone (6743) is higher than the Iris Pro Graphics 6200's average score across all its tests (6117).

In Geekbench Vulkan, the UHD Graphics 750 scores 8138, while the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 manages 6032. The 34.9% delta is smaller than the OpenCL gap but still represents a substantial advantage. Notably, the UHD Graphics 750's Vulkan score of 8138 exceeds its own OpenCL score of 6743, suggesting the newer architecture handles Vulkan workloads particularly well. The Iris Pro Graphics 6200 shows the opposite pattern: its Vulkan score of 6032 is higher than its OpenCL score of 4556, but still far below the UHD Graphics 750's output.

Interestingly, the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 also has a Geekbench Metal score of 7764, a test that the UHD Graphics 750 does not have recorded. That Metal score is higher than the UHD Graphics 750's OpenCL score but still below its Vulkan score. However, since Metal is not a shared test in this comparison, it does not factor into the head-to-head win count.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the head-to-head results. The UHD Graphics 750 averages 7441 across its recorded tests, while the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 averages 6117. That is a difference of 1324 points, or roughly 21.6% in favor of the newer part. The UHD Graphics 750 also ranks higher in the overall GPU percentile distribution, at 40 versus 35 for the Iris Pro Graphics 6200.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in several fundamental specifications, even though both are integrated graphics parts from Intel.

The process node shows a small difference: the Intel UHD Graphics 750 uses a 14 nm+++ process, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 uses a 14 nm node. Both are built by Intel, but the triple-plus variant represents a more refined iteration of the same base process.

Clock speeds differ as well. Both have a base clock of 300 MHz, but the boost clock is 1300 MHz on the UHD Graphics 750 versus 1100 MHz on the Iris Pro Graphics 6200. That 200 MHz boost advantage helps explain some of the performance gap, though not all of it.

The compute units are configured differently. The UHD Graphics 750 has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operations units. The Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has 384 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and only 6 raster operations units. This is an interesting inversion: the older GPU has 50% more shading units and three times as many TMUs, yet it still loses in every benchmark. The newer GPU compensates with fewer but presumably more efficient units, plus a higher boost clock.

Pixel and texture rates reflect these configurations. The UHD Graphics 750 achieves a pixel rate of 10.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 20.80 GTexel/s. The Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has a lower pixel rate of 6.600 GPixel/s but a much higher texture rate of 52.80 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput favors the older part slightly: 844.8 GFLOPS for the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 versus 665.6 GFLOPS for the UHD Graphics 750. However, the UHD Graphics 750 adds FP16 support at 1,331.2 GFLOPS (2:1 ratio), which the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 lacks entirely.

Both GPUs have a TDP of 15 W, use a Ring Bus interface, and rely on system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. Neither has a dedicated memory bus width or size, as both are integrated parts.

The API support differs meaningfully. The UHD Graphics 750 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Iris Pro Graphics 6200 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0. These differences in API versions likely contribute to the Vulkan benchmark gap.

Release dates are far apart: the UHD Graphics 750 launched on 2021-03-29, while the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 launched on 2014-09-04. Both are marked as end-of-life production status.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and are paired with different underlying chips.

The Intel UHD Graphics 750 is based on the Rocket Lake chip and uses Generation 12.1 architecture. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is based on the Broadwell GT3e chip and uses Generation 8.0 architecture. This represents a gap of roughly four architecture generations, which explains why the newer part can outperform the older one despite having fewer shading units and lower FP32 peak throughput.

The generation names in the database reflect this: the UHD Graphics 750 is listed under "HD Graphics (Rocket Lake)" while the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is listed under "HD Graphics (Broadwell)". The Rocket Lake generation brings architectural efficiency improvements, better instruction scheduling, and more modern API support, all of which show up in the benchmark scores.

Memory handling is identical in concept: both use system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. Neither has dedicated VRAM. This means both are constrained by the same general class of memory bottleneck, though the actual performance depends on the host system.

Feature differences are primarily visible in the API support. The UHD Graphics 750's Vulkan 1.4 support versus the Iris Pro Graphics 6200's Vulkan 1.0 support is a significant jump. Similarly, DirectX 12 (12_1) versus DirectX 12 (11_1) means the newer part supports more advanced DirectX feature levels. OpenGL support also improves from 4.4 to 4.6.

Neither GPU has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, as these are integrated graphics parts without dedicated acceleration hardware for those workloads. Both are IGP slot width parts with motherboard-dependent display outputs.

The FP16 capability is an architectural difference: the UHD Graphics 750 supports FP16 at 1,331.2 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has no recorded FP16 support. This makes the newer part more suitable for workloads that can leverage half-precision arithmetic.

Where Each One Wins

Intel UHD Graphics 750:

The UHD Graphics 750 wins in every shared benchmark category. In Geekbench OpenCL, it leads by 48%, scoring 6743 against 4556. In Geekbench Vulkan, it leads by 34.9%, scoring 8138 against 6032. Its average benchmark score of 7441 is 21.6% higher than the Iris Pro Graphics 6200's 6117. The UHD Graphics 750 also holds a higher percentile rank (40th versus 35th) among all GPUs in the database. Users running OpenCL or Vulkan workloads will see a substantial performance uplift with this part. The higher boost clock of 1300 MHz and the newer Generation 12.1 architecture contribute to this advantage, as does the more modern API support including DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200:

The Iris Pro Graphics 6200 does not win any head-to-head benchmark test in this comparison. It does, however, hold advantages in certain raw specifications. It has more shading units (384 versus 256), more texture mapping units (48 versus 16), and a higher FP32 throughput (844.8 GFLOPS versus 665.6 GFLOPS). Its texture rate of 52.80 GTexel/s is more than double that of the UHD Graphics 750. These specifications suggest it may handle texture-heavy workloads better in theory, but the recorded benchmark data does not confirm this. The Iris Pro Graphics 6200 also has a Geekbench Metal score of 7764, which is higher than the UHD Graphics 750's OpenCL score, but since Metal is not a shared test, it does not count toward the head-to-head record. The older part's only practical advantage is in the field of raw compute specifications, where its higher shading unit count and FP32 throughput could matter for very specific workloads that are not represented in the shared benchmarks. For most users, the UHD Graphics 750 is the stronger choice across the board.