Iris Plus Graphics 645 vs Radeon Vega 8 Embedded

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated665
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data20.33
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameRavenCoffee Lake GT3e
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date19 April 2018 (6 years ago)7 October 2019 (5 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 cores512384
Core clock speed300 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1101 MHz1050 MHz
Number of transistors4,940 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate35.2350.40
Floating-point processing power1.127 TFLOPS0.8064 TFLOPS
ROPs86
TMUs3248

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).

InterfaceIGPRing Bus
WidthIGPno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeSystem SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
Shared memoryno data+

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_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 19 April 2018 7 October 2019
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics 645 has an age advantage of 1 year, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Vega 8 Embedded and Iris Plus Graphics 645. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon Vega 8 Embedded is a desktop card while Iris Plus Graphics 645 is a notebook one.


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 Vega 8 Embedded
Radeon Vega 8 Embedded
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645
Iris Plus Graphics 645

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.


3.1 116 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 8 Embedded on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 121 vote

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 645 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.