Iris Plus Graphics 645 vs Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

Place in performance ranking	732	652
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Architecture	Vega (2017−2021)	Gen. 9.5 Coffee Lake (2019)
GPU code name	Vega Raven Ridge	Kaby Lake GT3e
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	7 January 2018 (6 years old)	10 July 2019 (4 years old)

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	384	48
Core clock speed	no data	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	1100 MHz	1150 MHz
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	50.40

Size and compatibility

Information on Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and Iris Plus Graphics 645 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Interface

no data

PCIe 3.0 x1

Memory

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	DDR3, DDR4
Maximum RAM amount	no data	System Shared
Shared memory	-	+

Video outputs and ports

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

no data

No outputs

Technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Sync

no data

API support

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

DirectX	12_1	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	no data	6.4
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	2.1
Vulkan	no data	1.1.103

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 3.03

Iris Plus Graphics 645 3.97
+31%

Iris Plus Graphics 645 outperforms Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) by 31% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 2991
+0.2%

Iris Plus Graphics 645 2985

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 2245
+18.6%

Iris Plus Graphics 645 1893

Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms Iris Plus Graphics 645 by 19% in 3DMark Fire Strike 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

−73.3%

26
+73.3%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7

−16.7%

7−8
+16.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8 +300%	2−3 −300%
Battlefield 5	12 +9.1%	10−12 −9.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −16.7%	14−16 +16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Far Cry New Dawn	8 +0%	8−9 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10 −20%	12−14 +20%
Hitman 3	13 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7 −57.1%	10−12 +57.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9 +125%	4−5 −125%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7 +250%	2−3 −250%
Battlefield 5	7−8 −57.1%	10−12 +57.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −16.7%	14−16 +16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −100%	8−9 +100%
Forza Horizon 4	9 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Hitman 3	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Metro Exodus	3 −100%	6−7 +100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3 −267%	10−12 +267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9 +0%	9−10 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	2−3
Battlefield 5	7−8 −57.1%	10−12 +57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −100%	8−9 +100%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −50%	12−14 +50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6 −50%	9−10 +50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Hitman 3	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Hitman 3	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%

This is how RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and Iris Plus Graphics 645 compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

Iris Plus Graphics 645 is 73.3% faster than RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

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

in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 300% faster than the Iris Plus Graphics 645.
in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Plus Graphics 645 is 267% faster than the RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000).

All in all, in popular games: