Iris Pro Graphics P6300 vs Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS with Iris Pro Graphics P6300, including specs and performance data.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS
2023
30 Watt
11.36
+191%

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS outperforms Iris Pro Graphics P6300 by a whopping 191% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking437721
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency27.2218.69
Architectureno dataGeneration 8.0 (2014−2015)
GPU code nameno dataBroadwell GT3e
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date26 October 2023 (1 year ago)5 September 2014 (10 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 cores1536384
Core clock speedno data300 MHz
Boost clock speed1250 MHz800 MHz
Number of transistorsno data189 million
Manufacturing process technology4 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rateno data38.40
Floating-point processing powerno data0.6144 TFLOPS
ROPsno data6
TMUsno data48

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).

Interfaceno dataIGP
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeLPDDR5xSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountno dataSystem Shared
Memory bus widthno dataSystem Shared
Memory clock speed8448 MHzSystem Shared
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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 (11_1)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.4
OpenCLno data2.0
Vulkan-1.1.80

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 HD32
+220%
10−12
−220%
1440p14
+250%
4−5
−250%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+195%
21−24
−195%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+229%
7−8
−229%
Hogwarts Legacy 20−22
+233%
6−7
−233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+213%
16−18
−213%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+195%
21−24
−195%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+229%
7−8
−229%
Far Cry 5 30
+200%
10−11
−200%
Fortnite 65−70
+219%
21−24
−219%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+200%
16−18
−200%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+192%
12−14
−192%
Hogwarts Legacy 20−22
+233%
6−7
−233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+193%
14−16
−193%
Valorant 100−110
+191%
35−40
−191%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+213%
16−18
−213%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+195%
21−24
−195%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+198%
55−60
−198%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+229%
7−8
−229%
Far Cry 5 28
+211%
9−10
−211%
Fortnite 65−70
+219%
21−24
−219%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+200%
16−18
−200%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+192%
12−14
−192%
Grand Theft Auto V 35
+192%
12−14
−192%
Hogwarts Legacy 20−22
+233%
6−7
−233%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+229%
7−8
−229%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+193%
14−16
−193%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40
+233%
12−14
−233%
Valorant 100−110
+191%
35−40
−191%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+213%
16−18
−213%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+229%
7−8
−229%
Far Cry 5 26
+225%
8−9
−225%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+200%
16−18
−200%
Hogwarts Legacy 20−22
+233%
6−7
−233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+193%
14−16
−193%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+217%
6−7
−217%
Valorant 100−110
+191%
35−40
−191%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 65−70
+219%
21−24
−219%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+200%
7−8
−200%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 85−90
+215%
27−30
−215%
Grand Theft Auto V 15
+200%
5−6
−200%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+221%
24−27
−221%
Valorant 120−130
+208%
40−45
−208%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+200%
10−11
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+200%
8−9
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+200%
9−10
−200%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+200%
8−9
−200%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+214%
7−8
−214%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Valorant 60−65
+233%
18−20
−233%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%

This is how Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS and Iris Pro Graphics P6300 compete in popular games:

  • Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is 220% faster in 1080p
  • Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is 250% faster in 1440p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.36 3.90
Recency 26 October 2023 5 September 2014
Chip lithography 4 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 15 Watt

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS has a 191.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

Iris Pro Graphics P6300, on the other hand, has 100% lower power consumption.

The Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Pro Graphics P6300 in performance tests.

Be aware that Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is a notebook card while Iris Pro Graphics P6300 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.


Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS
SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS
Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300
Iris Pro Graphics P6300

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.


2.9 11 votes

Rate Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 13 votes

Rate Iris Pro Graphics P6300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS or Iris Pro Graphics P6300, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.