Radeon RX Vega Nano vs Iris Plus Graphics 640

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking773not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency18.26no data
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameKaby Lake GT3eVega 10
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date3 January 2017 (9 years ago)no data

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 cores3844096
Core clock speed300 MHz1200 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz1546 MHz
Number of transistors189 million12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm++14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate52.80395.8
Floating-point processing power0.8448 TFLOPSno data
ROPs664
TMUs48256

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).

InterfaceRing BusPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data152 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 8-pin

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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4HBM2
Maximum RAM amount32 GB8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared2048 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1600 MBps
Memory bandwidthno data409.6 GB/s
Shared memory+-

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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

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.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.1
Vulkan1.31.3

Pros & cons summary


Maximum RAM amount 32 GB 8 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 175 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics 640 has a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 1066.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Iris Plus Graphics 640 and Radeon RX Vega Nano. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Iris Plus Graphics 640 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon RX Vega Nano is a desktop one.

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 Plus Graphics 640
Iris Plus Graphics 640
AMD Radeon RX Vega Nano
Radeon RX Vega Nano

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.


3.3 319 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 640 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 4 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega Nano on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Iris Plus Graphics 640 or Radeon RX Vega Nano, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.