Iris Pro Graphics 6200 vs Radeon RX Vega M GH

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega M GH and Iris Pro Graphics 6200, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX Vega M GH
2018
4 GB HBM2, 100 Watt
17.07
+332%

RX Vega M GH outperforms Iris Pro Graphics 6200 by a whopping 332% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking317693
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency11.8718.30
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)
GPU code namePolaris 22Broadwell GT3e
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 February 2018 (6 years 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 speed1063 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1190 MHz1100 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate114.252.80
Floating-point processing power3.656 TFLOPS0.8448 TFLOPS
ROPs646
TMUs9648

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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
InterfaceIGPRing 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 typeHBM2System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width1024 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed800 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth204.8 GB/sno data
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 outputsPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.131+

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.

RX Vega M GH 17.07
+332%
Iris Pro Graphics 6200 3.95

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.

RX Vega M GH 6586
+332%
Iris Pro Graphics 6200 1523

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.

RX Vega M GH 14302
+417%
Iris Pro Graphics 6200 2766

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.

RX Vega M GH 10248
+490%
Iris Pro Graphics 6200 1737

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

RX Vega M GH 59162
+284%
Iris Pro Graphics 6200 15388

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 HD58
+383%
12−14
−383%
1440p31
+343%
7−8
−343%
4K26
+333%
6−7
−333%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 39
+457%
7−8
−457%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 44
+300%
10−12
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+522%
9−10
−522%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 36
+300%
9−10
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 30
+329%
7−8
−329%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+400%
8−9
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 52
+373%
10−12
−373%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+370%
21−24
−370%
Hitman 3 30−35
+267%
9−10
−267%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+215%
27−30
−215%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+729%
7−8
−729%
Red Dead Redemption 2 39
+290%
10−11
−290%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 83
+453%
14−16
−453%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+100%
40−45
−100%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+245%
10−12
−245%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Battlefield 5 33
+267%
9−10
−267%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 32
+256%
9−10
−256%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
+229%
7−8
−229%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+400%
8−9
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 41
+273%
10−12
−273%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+370%
21−24
−370%
Hitman 3 30−35
+267%
9−10
−267%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+215%
27−30
−215%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+729%
7−8
−729%
Red Dead Redemption 2 48
+380%
10−11
−380%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 68
+353%
14−16
−353%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+144%
16−18
−144%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+100%
40−45
−100%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21
+90.9%
10−12
−90.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21
+133%
9−10
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
+229%
7−8
−229%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+400%
8−9
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+370%
21−24
−370%
Hitman 3 30−35
+267%
9−10
−267%
Horizon Zero Dawn 56
+107%
27−30
−107%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 57
+280%
14−16
−280%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 34
+113%
16−18
−113%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+100%
40−45
−100%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 28
+180%
10−11
−180%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 39
+457%
7−8
−457%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+333%
6−7
−333%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 13
+333%
3−4
−333%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+2200%
4−5
−2200%
Hitman 3 20−22
+150%
8−9
−150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 41
+356%
9−10
−356%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+343%
7−8
−343%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+371%
7−8
−371%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+533%
3−4
−533%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+329%
24−27
−329%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+250%
8−9
−250%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18
+800%
2−3
−800%
Far Cry New Dawn 14
+600%
2−3
−600%
Hitman 3 12−14 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+383%
18−20
−383%
Metro Exodus 16−18 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%

This is how RX Vega M GH and Iris Pro Graphics 6200 compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega M GH is 383% faster in 1080p
  • RX Vega M GH is 343% faster in 1440p
  • RX Vega M GH is 333% faster in 4K

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX Vega M GH is 2200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, RX Vega M GH surpassed Iris Pro Graphics 6200 in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 17.07 3.95
Recency 1 February 2018 5 September 2014
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 15 Watt

RX Vega M GH has a 332.2% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 3 years.

Iris Pro Graphics 6200, on the other hand, has 566.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega M GH is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Pro Graphics 6200 in performance tests.


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

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.


AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH
Radeon RX Vega M GH
Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200
Iris Pro Graphics 6200

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.6 45 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega M GH on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 85 votes

Rate Iris Pro Graphics 6200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.