GeForce GT 425M vs Iris Pro Graphics 6200

Place in the ranking	697	1020
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	18.05	4.02
Architecture	Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	Broadwell GT3e	GF108
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	5 September 2014 (10 years ago)	3 September 2010 (14 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	96
Core clock speed	300 MHz	560 MHz
Boost clock speed	1100 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	189 million	585 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	23 Watt
Texture fill rate	52.80	8.960
Floating-point processing power	0.8448 TFLOPS	0.215 TFLOPS
ROPs	6	4
TMUs	48	16

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 size	medium sized	medium sized
Interface	Ring Bus	PCIe 2.0 x16

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	System Shared	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	1 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	25.6 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 (11_1)	12 API
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.4	4.5
OpenCL	3.0	1.1
Vulkan	+	N/A
CUDA	-	+

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 Pro Graphics 6200 3.95
+193%

GT 425M 1.35

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 Pro Graphics 6200 1523
+192%

GT 425M 522

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.

Iris Pro Graphics 6200 2766
+267%

GT 425M 753

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:

900p	30−35 +173%	11 −173%
Full HD	45−50 +165%	17 −165%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

7−8
+75%

4−5

−75%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Battlefield 5	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +667%	3−4 −667%
Hitman 3	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +92.9%	14−16 −92.9%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +27.3%	30−35 −27.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Battlefield 5	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +667%	3−4 −667%
Hitman 3	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +92.9%	14−16 −92.9%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +45.5%	10−12 −45.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +27.3%	30−35 −27.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +667%	3−4 −667%
Hitman 3	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +92.9%	14−16 −92.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +45.5%	10−12 −45.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +27.3%	30−35 −27.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11
+400%

2−3

−400%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Hitman 3	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 +300%	6−7 −300%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
+100%

4−5

−100%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Hitman 3	0−1	0−1
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	2−3	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
+66.7%

3−4

−66.7%

This is how Iris Pro Graphics 6200 and GT 425M compete in popular games:

Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is 173% faster in 900p
Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is 165% faster in 1080p

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is 667% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, Iris Pro Graphics 6200 surpassed GT 425M in all 49 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.95	1.35
Recency	5 September 2014	3 September 2010
Chip lithography	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	23 Watt

Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has a 192.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 53.3% lower power consumption.

The Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 425M in performance tests.

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