Radeon PRO W6300 vs Iris Plus Graphics 650

Place in the ranking	648	358
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	21.01	39.92
Architecture	Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	Kaby Lake GT3e	Navi 24
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	3 January 2017 (7 years ago)	19 January 2022 (2 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 cores	384	768
Core clock speed	300 MHz	1512 MHz
Boost clock speed	1150 MHz	2040 MHz
Number of transistors	189 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm++	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	25 Watt
Texture fill rate	55.20	97.92
Floating-point processing power	0.8832 TFLOPS	3.133 TFLOPS
ROPs	6	32
TMUs	48	48
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	12

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).

Interface	Ring Bus	PCIe 4.0 x4
Width	IGP	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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 type	DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	32 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	32 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	64 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 Connectors

Portable Device Dependent

No 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.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	2.2
Vulkan	1.3	1.3

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 Plus Graphics 650 4.55

PRO W6300 14.41
+217%

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 Plus Graphics 650 1757

PRO W6300 5559
+216%

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 HD

−210%

65−70
+210%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

8−9
−200%

24−27

+200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −208%	40−45 +208%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Battlefield 5	10−12 −173%	30−33 +173%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −200%	24−27 +200%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −208%	40−45 +208%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −204%	85−90 +204%
Hitman 3	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−33 −217%	95−100 +217%
Metro Exodus	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −192%	35−40 +192%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −194%	50−55 +194%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 −211%	140−150 +211%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −208%	40−45 +208%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Battlefield 5	10−12 −173%	30−33 +173%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −200%	24−27 +200%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −208%	40−45 +208%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −204%	85−90 +204%
Hitman 3	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−33 −217%	95−100 +217%
Metro Exodus	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −192%	35−40 +192%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −194%	50−55 +194%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −194%	50−55 +194%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 −211%	140−150 +211%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −208%	40−45 +208%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −200%	24−27 +200%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −204%	85−90 +204%
Hitman 3	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−33 −217%	95−100 +217%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −194%	50−55 +194%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −194%	50−55 +194%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 −211%	140−150 +211%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14

−192%

35−40
+192%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −200%	24−27 +200%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 −200%	21−24 +200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −180%	14−16 +180%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −200%	24−27 +200%
Hitman 3	9−10 −200%	27−30 +200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −204%	85−90 +204%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
−200%

24−27

+200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −200%	9−10 +200%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −200%	9−10 +200%
Hitman 3	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −200%	9−10 +200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −200%	9−10 +200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
−180%

14−16

+180%

This is how Iris Plus Graphics 650 and PRO W6300 compete in popular games:

PRO W6300 is 210% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.55	14.41
Recency	3 January 2017	19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount	32 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	25 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics 650 has a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

PRO W6300, on the other hand, has a 216.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W6300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Plus Graphics 650 in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Plus Graphics 650 is a desktop card while Radeon PRO W6300 is a workstation one.

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