Iris Pro Graphics 6200 vs Arc Graphics 130V

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc Graphics 130V and Iris Pro Graphics 6200, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Arc Graphics 130V
16 GB LPDDR5x
11.70
+195%

Arc Graphics 130V outperforms Iris Pro Graphics 6200 by a whopping 195% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking412700
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data18.22
ArchitectureXe² (2025)Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)
GPU code nameLunar Lake iGPUBroadwell GT3e
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release dateno data5 September 2014 (10 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores7384
Core clock speedno data300 MHz
Boost clock speed1850 MHz1100 MHz
Number of transistorsno data189 million
Manufacturing process technology3 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data15 Watt
Texture fill rateno data52.80
Floating-point processing powerno data0.8448 TFLOPS
ROPsno data6
TMUsno data48

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
Interfaceno dataRing Bus

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 typeLPDDR5xSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amount16 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus widthno dataSystem Shared
Memory clock speedno dataSystem Shared
Shared memory++

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectorsno dataPortable 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 compatibility

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

DirectX12_212 (11_1)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.4
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Arc Graphics 130V 11.70
+195%
Iris Pro Graphics 6200 3.96

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.

Arc Graphics 130V 4499
+195%
Iris Pro Graphics 6200 1523

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Arc Graphics 130V 9523
+244%
Iris Pro Graphics 6200 2766

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Arc Graphics 130V 8255
+375%
Iris Pro Graphics 6200 1737

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 HD32
+220%
10−12
−220%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 41
+273%
10−12
−273%
Elden Ring 30−35
+278%
9−10
−278%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+245%
10−12
−245%
Counter-Strike 2 31
+182%
10−12
−182%
Forza Horizon 4 71
+318%
16−18
−318%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+300%
8−9
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+131%
12−14
−131%
Valorant 45−50
+650%
6−7
−650%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+245%
10−12
−245%
Counter-Strike 2 28
+155%
10−12
−155%
Dota 2 41
+242%
12−14
−242%
Elden Ring 30−35
+278%
9−10
−278%
Far Cry 5 28
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Fortnite 65−70
+191%
21−24
−191%
Forza Horizon 4 58
+241%
16−18
−241%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+250%
12−14
−250%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+300%
8−9
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+151%
35−40
−151%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+131%
12−14
−131%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+150%
14−16
−150%
Valorant 45−50
+650%
6−7
−650%
World of Tanks 160−170
+142%
65−70
−142%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+245%
10−12
−245%
Counter-Strike 2 25
+127%
10−12
−127%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+119%
21−24
−119%
Forza Horizon 4 48
+182%
16−18
−182%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+151%
35−40
−151%
Valorant 45−50
+650%
6−7
−650%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%
Elden Ring 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
World of Tanks 80−85
+196%
27−30
−196%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+189%
9−10
−189%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+575%
4−5
−575%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Valorant 27−30
+142%
12−14
−142%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Dota 2 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Elden Ring 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+209%
10−12
−209%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Fortnite 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%
Valorant 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how Arc Graphics 130V and Iris Pro Graphics 6200 compete in popular games:

  • Arc Graphics 130V is 220% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc Graphics 130V is 2300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc Graphics 130V is ahead in 51 test (85%)
  • there's a draw in 9 tests (15%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.70 3.96
Chip lithography 3 nm 14 nm

Arc Graphics 130V has a 195.5% higher aggregate performance score, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc Graphics 130V is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


Intel Arc Graphics 130V
Arc Graphics 130V
Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200
Iris Pro Graphics 6200

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.


3.5 8 votes

Rate Arc Graphics 130V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 86 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.