Radeon Pro W6600M vs Iris Graphics 5100
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Iris Graphics 5100 with Radeon Pro W6600M, including specs and performance data.
Pro W6600M outperforms Graphics 5100 by a whopping 1536% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 987 | 225 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 4.54 | 24.77 |
| Architecture | Generation 7.5 (2013) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | Haswell GT3 | Navi 23 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 27 May 2013 (13 years ago) | 8 June 2021 (5 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 320 | 1792 |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz | 1224 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | 2034 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,300 million | 11,060 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 90 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 44.00 | 227.8 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.704 TFLOPS | 7.29 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 64 |
| TMUs | 40 | 112 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 28 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 448 KB |
| L1 Cache | no data | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 2 MB |
| L3 Cache | no data | 32 MB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | System Shared | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 224.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | Portable Device Dependent |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | + | 1.3 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 13
−1515%
| 210−220
+1515%
|
| 4K | 7
−1471%
| 110−120
+1471%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−8100%
|
160−170
+8100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−2067%
|
65−70
+2067%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 1−2
−7200%
|
70−75
+7200%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−2650%
|
110−120
+2650%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−8100%
|
160−170
+8100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−2067%
|
65−70
+2067%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 5−6
−2040%
|
100−110
+2040%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−2275%
|
95−100
+2275%
|
| Fortnite | 7−8
−1843%
|
130−140
+1843%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−1167%
|
110−120
+1167%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−964%
|
110−120
+964%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−405%
|
180−190
+405%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−2650%
|
110−120
+2650%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−8100%
|
160−170
+8100%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 31
−781%
|
270−280
+781%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−2067%
|
65−70
+2067%
|
| Dota 2 | 18
−639%
|
130−140
+639%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 5−6
−2040%
|
100−110
+2040%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−2275%
|
95−100
+2275%
|
| Fortnite | 7−8
−1843%
|
130−140
+1843%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−1167%
|
110−120
+1167%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
−5050%
|
100−110
+5050%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−2133%
|
65−70
+2133%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−964%
|
110−120
+964%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−1063%
|
90−95
+1063%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−405%
|
180−190
+405%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−2650%
|
110−120
+2650%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−2067%
|
65−70
+2067%
|
| Dota 2 | 17
−682%
|
130−140
+682%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 5−6
−2040%
|
100−110
+2040%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−2275%
|
95−100
+2275%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−1167%
|
110−120
+1167%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−964%
|
110−120
+964%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−1063%
|
90−95
+1063%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−405%
|
180−190
+405%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 7−8
−1843%
|
130−140
+1843%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−1575%
|
65−70
+1575%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
−1608%
|
200−210
+1608%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−872%
|
170−180
+872%
|
| Valorant | 10−12
−1882%
|
210−220
+1882%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−3000%
|
30−35
+3000%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 4−5
−1600%
|
65−70
+1600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−3350%
|
65−70
+3350%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1850%
|
75−80
+1850%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−1567%
|
50−55
+1567%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−2333%
|
70−75
+2333%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−287%
|
55−60
+287%
|
| Valorant | 9−10
−1800%
|
170−180
+1800%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 6
−1417%
|
90−95
+1417%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 0−1 | 30−35 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 35−40 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−1600%
|
30−35
+1600%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−1033%
|
30−35
+1033%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
This is how Iris Graphics 5100 and Pro W6600M compete in popular games:
- Pro W6600M is 1515% faster in 1080p
- Pro W6600M is 1471% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the Pro W6600M is 8100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Pro W6600M performs better in 51 tests (84%)
- there's a draw in 10 tests (16%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.76 | 28.80 |
| Recency | 27 May 2013 | 8 June 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 90 Watt |
Iris Graphics 5100 has 200% lower power consumption.
Pro W6600M, on the other hand, has a 1536% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 214% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon Pro W6600M is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Graphics 5100 in performance tests.
Be aware that Iris Graphics 5100 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro W6600M is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
