Iris Pro Graphics P6300 vs Radeon HD 8550G + HD 8750M Dual Graphics
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 8550G + HD 8750M Dual Graphics with Iris Pro Graphics P6300, including specs and performance data.
Pro Graphics P6300 outperforms HD 8550G + HD 8750M Dual Graphics by a considerable 49% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 862 | 754 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 19.32 |
| Architecture | no data | Generation 8.0 (2014−2015) |
| GPU code name | no data | Broadwell GT3e |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 August 2013 (12 years ago) | 5 September 2014 (11 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 | 640 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 720 / 825 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 800 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 189 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 38.40 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.6144 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 6 |
| TMUs | no data | 48 |
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 | no data |
| Interface | no data | IGP |
| Width | no data | IGP |
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 | DDR3 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | System Shared |
| 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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11 | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.0 |
| 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.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Fortnite | 12−14
−38.5%
|
18−20
+38.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−38.5%
|
18−20
+38.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−38.5%
|
18−20
+38.5%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−39.5%
|
60−65
+39.5%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 50−55
−40%
|
70−75
+40%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
−34.6%
|
35−40
+34.6%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Fortnite | 12−14
−38.5%
|
18−20
+38.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−38.5%
|
18−20
+38.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−38.5%
|
18−20
+38.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−39.5%
|
60−65
+39.5%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
−34.6%
|
35−40
+34.6%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−38.5%
|
18−20
+38.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−38.5%
|
18−20
+38.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−39.5%
|
60−65
+39.5%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 12−14
−38.5%
|
18−20
+38.5%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 18−20
−42.1%
|
27−30
+42.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
−45.8%
|
35−40
+45.8%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
−30.4%
|
30−33
+30.4%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−40%
|
21−24
+40%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
−38.5%
|
18−20
+38.5%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.53 | 3.76 |
| Recency | 1 August 2013 | 5 September 2014 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
Iris Pro Graphics P6300 has a 48.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8550G + HD 8750M Dual Graphics in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 8550G + HD 8750M Dual Graphics is a notebook graphics card while Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
