Iris Pro Graphics 6200 vs Radeon PRO W7500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon PRO W7500 with Iris Pro Graphics 6200, including specs and performance data.

PRO W7500
2023, $429
8 GB GDDR6, 70 Watt
31.67
+765%

PRO W7500 outperforms Pro Graphics 6200 by a whopping 765% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking199778
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation39.76no data
Power efficiency35.0018.88
ArchitectureRDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)
GPU code nameNavi 33Broadwell GT3e
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date3 August 2023 (3 years ago)5 September 2014 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$429 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

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 cores1792384
Core clock speed1500 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1700 MHz1100 MHz
Number of transistors13,300 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)70 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate190.452.80
Floating-point processing power12.19 TFLOPS0.8448 TFLOPS
ROPs646
TMUs11248
Ray Tracing Cores28no data
L0 Cache448 KBno data
L1 Cache512 KBno data
L2 Cache2 MBno data
L3 Cache32 MBno data

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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8Ring Bus
Length216 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR6System Shared
Maximum RAM amount8 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1344 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth172.0 GB/sno data
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 Connectors4x DisplayPort 2.1Portable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 (11_1)
Shader Model6.75.1
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL2.23.0
Vulkan1.3+

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.

PRO W7500 31.67
+765%
Iris Pro Graphics 6200 3.66

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.

PRO W7500 13196
+766%
Samples: 117
Iris Pro Graphics 6200 1523

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Palworld 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Palworld 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Palworld 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Palworld 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Palworld 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 56 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 31.67 3.66
Recency 3 August 2023 5 September 2014
Chip lithography 6 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 70 Watt 15 Watt

PRO W7500 has a 765% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 133% more advanced lithography process.

Iris Pro Graphics 6200, on the other hand, has 367% lower power consumption.

The Radeon PRO W7500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon PRO W7500 is a workstation graphics card while Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.1 23 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 98 votes

Rate Iris Pro Graphics 6200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon PRO W7500 or Iris Pro Graphics 6200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.