Iris Plus Graphics 645 vs Iris Graphics 6100

#ad
Buy
VS
#ad
Buy

Combined performance score

Iris Graphics 6100
2.03

Iris Plus Graphics 645 outperforms Iris Graphics 6100 by 96% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking834651
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money0.06no data
ArchitectureGen. 8 Broadwell (2014−2015)Gen. 9.5 Coffee Lake (2019)
GPU code nameBroadwell GT3Kaby Lake GT3e
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 January 2015 (9 years old)10 July 2019 (4 years old)
Current price$854 no data
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores4848
Core clock speed300 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz1150 MHz
Number of transistors189 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate52.8050.40

Size and compatibility

Information on Iris Graphics 6100 and Iris Plus Graphics 645 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x1PCIe 3.0 x1
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

Memory

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 typeSystem SharedDDR3, DDR4
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus width64/128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
Shared memory++

Video outputs and ports

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 outputsNo outputs

Technologies

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

Quick Sync++

API support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.1.801.1.103

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

Iris Graphics 6100 2.03
Iris Plus Graphics 645 3.97
+95.6%

Iris Plus Graphics 645 outperforms Iris Graphics 6100 by 96% in our combined benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

Iris Graphics 6100 902
Iris Plus Graphics 645 1727
+91.5%

Iris Plus Graphics 645 outperforms Iris Graphics 6100 by 91% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Iris Graphics 6100 1695
Iris Plus Graphics 645 2985
+76.2%

Iris Plus Graphics 645 outperforms Iris Graphics 6100 by 76% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Iris Graphics 6100 874
Iris Plus Graphics 645 1893
+117%

Iris Plus Graphics 645 outperforms Iris Graphics 6100 by 117% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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 HD14
−85.7%
26
+85.7%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Battlefield 5 3−4
−267%
10−12
+267%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Hitman 3 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Battlefield 5 3−4
−267%
10−12
+267%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Hitman 3 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Battlefield 5 3−4
−267%
10−12
+267%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Hitman 3 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Metro Exodus 0−1 2−3
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hitman 3 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

This is how Iris Graphics 6100 and Iris Plus Graphics 645 compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • Iris Plus Graphics 645 is 85.7% faster than Iris Graphics 6100

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

  • in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Iris Plus Graphics 645 is 700% faster than the Iris Graphics 6100.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Iris Plus Graphics 645 is ahead in 46 tests (96%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (4%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 2.03 3.97
Recency 5 January 2015 10 July 2019
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 15 Watt

The Iris Plus Graphics 645 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Graphics 6100 in performance tests.


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

User ratings

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


Intel Iris Graphics 6100
Iris Graphics 6100
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645
Iris Plus Graphics 645

Similar GPU comparisons

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

User ratings: view and submit

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


3.2 106 votes

Rate Intel Iris Graphics 6100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 104 votes

Rate Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

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