Iris Plus Graphics 645 vs Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) and Iris Plus Graphics 645, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Plus Graphics 645 outperforms R4 (Stoney Ridge) by a whopping 292% 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 | 1133 | 718 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 5.48 | 21.47 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016) | Generation 9.5 (2016−2020) |
| GPU code name | Stoney Ridge | Coffee Lake GT3e |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 June 2016 (9 years ago) | 7 October 2019 (6 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 | 192 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 600 MHz | 1050 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm+++ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 50.40 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.8064 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).
| Interface | no data | Ring Bus |
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 | no data | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 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 | Portable Device Dependent |
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.
| DirectX | 12 (FL 12_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.3 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
3DMark Time Spy Graphics
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 | 9
−189%
| 26
+189%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−350%
|
9−10
+350%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 16−18 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−350%
|
9−10
+350%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−550%
|
12−14
+550%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1150%
|
24−27
+1150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−186%
|
20−22
+186%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−1000%
|
10−12
+1000%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−88.9%
|
16−18
+88.9%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−75%
|
55−60
+75%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 16−18 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
−188%
|
75−80
+188%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−350%
|
9−10
+350%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−93.3%
|
29
+93.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−550%
|
12−14
+550%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1150%
|
24−27
+1150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−186%
|
20−22
+186%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−1000%
|
10−12
+1000%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−700%
|
8−9
+700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−88.9%
|
16−18
+88.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−85.7%
|
12−14
+85.7%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−75%
|
55−60
+75%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 16−18 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−350%
|
9−10
+350%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−80%
|
27
+80%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−550%
|
12−14
+550%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−186%
|
20−22
+186%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−88.9%
|
16−18
+88.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−85.7%
|
12−14
+85.7%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−75%
|
55−60
+75%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1150%
|
24−27
+1150%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−100%
|
8−9
+100%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 7−8
−357%
|
30−35
+357%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−200%
|
30−35
+200%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−2150%
|
45−50
+2150%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 3−4 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−700%
|
8−9
+700%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−233%
|
10−11
+233%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−14.3%
|
16−18
+14.3%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−250%
|
21−24
+250%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 0−1 | 14−16 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
This is how R4 (Stoney Ridge) and Iris Plus Graphics 645 compete in popular games:
- Iris Plus Graphics 645 is 189% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Plus Graphics 645 is 2150% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Iris Plus Graphics 645 performs better in 44 tests (81%)
- there's a draw in 10 tests (19%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.07 | 4.19 |
| Recency | 1 June 2016 | 7 October 2019 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
Iris Plus Graphics 645 has a 291.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The Iris Plus Graphics 645 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
