Radeon Pro 5300M vs Iris Graphics 6100

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Graphics 6100 with Radeon Pro 5300M, including specs and performance data.

Iris Graphics 6100
2015
15 Watt
2.32

Pro 5300M outperforms Iris Graphics 6100 by a whopping 565% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking844341
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.7112.57
ArchitectureGeneration 8.0 (2014−2015)RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code nameBroadwell GT3Navi 14
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date5 January 2015 (9 years ago)13 November 2019 (4 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 cores3841280
Core clock speed300 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1250 MHz
Number of transistors189 million6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt85 Watt
Texture fill rate48.00100.0
Floating-point processing power0.768 TFLOPS3.2 TFLOPS
ROPs632
TMUs4880

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
InterfaceRing BusPCIe 4.0 x8
WidthIGPno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data192.0 GB/s
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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL3.02.0
Vulkan+1.2.131

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.

Iris Graphics 6100 2.32
Pro 5300M 15.43
+565%

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.

Iris Graphics 6100 894
Pro 5300M 5953
+566%

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
−543%
90−95
+543%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−400%
35−40
+400%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−4900%
50−55
+4900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−520%
30−35
+520%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−1100%
35−40
+1100%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−740%
40−45
+740%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−1150%
100−105
+1150%
Hitman 3 7−8
−314%
27−30
+314%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−333%
75−80
+333%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−950%
40−45
+950%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−400%
50−55
+400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−119%
75−80
+119%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−400%
35−40
+400%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−4900%
50−55
+4900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−520%
30−35
+520%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−1100%
35−40
+1100%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−740%
40−45
+740%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−1150%
100−105
+1150%
Hitman 3 7−8
−314%
27−30
+314%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−333%
75−80
+333%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−950%
40−45
+950%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−400%
50−55
+400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
−164%
35−40
+164%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−119%
75−80
+119%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−400%
35−40
+400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−520%
30−35
+520%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−1100%
35−40
+1100%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−1150%
100−105
+1150%
Hitman 3 7−8
−314%
27−30
+314%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−333%
75−80
+333%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−400%
50−55
+400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−208%
35−40
+208%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−119%
75−80
+119%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−950%
40−45
+950%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−700%
24−27
+700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−650%
14−16
+650%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−1600%
16−18
+1600%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%
Hitman 3 7−8
−157%
18−20
+157%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−417%
30−35
+417%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−764%
95−100
+764%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−400%
24−27
+400%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−1000%
10−12
+1000%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−600%
7−8
+600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 6−7

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

This is how Iris Graphics 6100 and Pro 5300M compete in popular games:

  • Pro 5300M is 543% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Pro 5300M is 4900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro 5300M is ahead in 54 tests (76%)
  • there's a draw in 17 tests (24%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.32 15.43
Recency 5 January 2015 13 November 2019
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 85 Watt

Iris Graphics 6100 has 466.7% lower power consumption.

Pro 5300M, on the other hand, has a 565.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro 5300M is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Graphics 6100 in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Graphics 6100 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro 5300M is a mobile workstation one.


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 Iris Graphics 6100
Iris Graphics 6100
AMD Radeon Pro 5300M
Radeon Pro 5300M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.3 122 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 169 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 5300M 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.