Page not found — Technical City
Page not found — Technical City
We couldn’t find such page: /en/video/radeon-r9-m380-vs-iris-pro-graphics-6200%23general-info
Popular graphics cards comparisons
GeForce RTX
3060 Ti
vs
GeForce RTX
3060
GeForce RTX
3060 Ti
vs
GeForce RTX
3070
GeForce GTX
1050 Ti
vs
GeForce GTX
1650
GeForce GTX
1660 Ti
vs
GeForce GTX
1660 Super
GeForce GTX
1660 Super
vs
GeForce RTX
3050 8 GB
GeForce RTX
2060 Super
vs
GeForce RTX
3060
Popular graphics cards
GeForce GTX
1050 Ti
GeForce RTX
4090
Radeon RX
580
GeForce RTX
3060
Radeon RX
Vega 7
GeForce GTX
1650
Popular CPU comparisons
Ryzen 5
5600X
vs
Core i5
12400F
Ryzen 5
3600
vs
Core i5
10400F
Ryzen 5
3600
vs
Ryzen 5
5600X
Ryzen 5
5600X
vs
Ryzen 5
5600G
Core i5
10400F
vs
Core i3
12100F
Core i5
1135G7
vs
Ryzen 5
5500U
Popular CPUs
Ryzen 5
5500U
EPYC
7h22
Core i3
1115G4
Core i5
1135G7
Ryzen 5
3500U
Ryzen 3
5300U
Page not found — Technical City
Page not found — Technical City
We couldn’t find such page: /en/video/radeon-r9-m380-vs-iris-pro-graphics-6200%23characteristics
Popular graphics cards comparisons
GeForce RTX
3060 Ti
vs
GeForce RTX
3060
GeForce RTX
3060 Ti
vs
GeForce RTX
3070
GeForce GTX
1050 Ti
vs
GeForce GTX
1650
GeForce GTX
1660 Ti
vs
GeForce GTX
1660 Super
GeForce GTX
1660 Super
vs
GeForce RTX
3050 8 GB
GeForce RTX
2060 Super
vs
GeForce RTX
3060
Popular graphics cards
GeForce GTX
1050 Ti
GeForce RTX
4090
Radeon RX
580
GeForce RTX
3060
Radeon RX
Vega 7
GeForce GTX
1650
Popular CPU comparisons
Ryzen 5
5600X
vs
Core i5
12400F
Ryzen 5
3600
vs
Core i5
10400F
Ryzen 5
3600
vs
Ryzen 5
5600X
Ryzen 5
5600X
vs
Ryzen 5
5600G
Core i5
10400F
vs
Core i3
12100F
Core i5
1135G7
vs
Ryzen 5
5500U
Popular CPUs
Ryzen 5
5500U
EPYC
7h22
Core i3
1115G4
Core i5
1135G7
Ryzen 5
3500U
Ryzen 3
5300U
Compare AMD Radeon R9 M380 and Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 M380 and Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 video cards by all known characteristics in the categories: General information, Specifications, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions, requirements, API support, Memory, Technology support.
Analysis of video card performance by benchmarks: PassMark — G3D Mark, PassMark — G2D Mark, Geekbench — OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T -Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps).
nine0003
AMD Radeon R9 M380
versus
Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200
Benefits
Reasons to choose AMD Radeon R9 M380
- Newer graphics card, release dates difference 8 month(s)
- more than 3MHz(core frequency) vs 300 MHz
- 16 times more shader processors: 768 vs 48
- 74% more floating point performance: 1,536 gflops vs 883.
2 gflops - 2x more performance in PassMark — G3D Mark: 2891 vs 1441
- About 7% more performance in PassMark — G2D Mark: 601 vs 563
- 2.9x more performance in Geekbench — OpenCL( a) more: 14383 vs 4913
- About 49% more performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) benchmark: 3688 vs 2475
- About 24% more performance in GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) benchmark: 2855 vs 2304
- GFXBench 4.0 performance — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) about 49% more: 3688 vs 2475
- GFXBench 4.0 performance — T-Rex (Fps) about 24% more: 2855 vs 2304
| Production date | 5 May 2015 vs 5 September 2014 |
| Core clock | 900 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Number of shaders | 768 vs 48 |
| Floating point performance | 1. 536 gflops vs 883.2 gflops |
| PassMark — G3D Mark | 2891 vs 1441 |
| PassMark — G2D Mark | |
| Geekbench — OpenCL | 14383 vs 4913 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3688 vs 2475 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) | 2855 vs 2304 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3688 vs 2475 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) | 2855 vs 2304 |
Reasons to choose Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200
- Boost core clock 15% faster: 1150 MHz vs 1000 MHz14 nm vs 28 nm GFXBench 4.
0 — Manhattan (Fps) about 79% more: 958 vs 536
| Boost Core Clock | 1150 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
| Texturing speed | 55.2 GTexel/s vs 48 GTexel/s |
| Process | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames) | 958 vs 536 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) | 958 vs 536 |
Benchmark comparison
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 M380
GPU 2: Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200
| PassMark — G3D Mark |
|
|||
| PassMark — G2D Mark |
|
nine0046 | ||
| Geekbench — OpenCL |
|
|||
GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
nine0042 | |||
| GPU 1 | ||||
| GPU 2 |
| GPU 1 |
| GPU 2 |
nine0046
| GPU 1 |
| GPU 2 |
0 — Manhattan (Fps) | GPU 1 |
| GPU 2 |
nine0046
| GPU 1 |
| GPU 2 |
| Name | AMD Radeon R9M380 | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark — G3D Mark | 2891 | 1441 |
| PassMark — G2D Mark | 601 | 563 |
| Geekbench — OpenCL | 4913 | |
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
34.701 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 546.907 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.605 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) | 48.878 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 194.051 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3688 | 2475 |
GFXBench 4. 0 — Manhattan (Frames) |
536 | 958 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) | 2855 | 2304 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3688 | 2475 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) | 536 | 958 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) | 2304 |
Performance comparison
| AMD Radeon R9 M380 | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 | |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | GCN 2. 0 |
Generation 8.0 |
| Codename | Strato | Broadwell GT3e |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 300 Series | |
| Production date | May 5, 2015 | September 5, 2014 |
| Ranking | 655 | 693 |
| Type | Desktop | Laptop |
| Boost core clock | 1000MHz | 1150MHz |
| Core frequency | 900MHz | 300MHz |
| Floating point performance | 1. 536 gflops |
883.2 gflops |
| Process | 28nm | |
| Number of shaders | 768 | 48 |
| Texturing speed | 48 GTexel/s | 55.2 GTexel/s |
| Number of transistors | 2,080 million | 189 million |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | |
| Video connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| Eyefinity | ||
| Tire | PCIe 3. 0 |
|
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x1 |
| Notebook size | medium sized | |
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_1) |
| Mantle | ||
| OpenCL | Not Listed | nine0049 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| Maximum memory size | 4GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | |
| Memory bus width | 128bit | |
| Memory frequency | 1500MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
DirectCompute 5. 0 |
||
| DualGraphics | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| Switchable graphics | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
| Quick Sync | nine0045 |
Compare AMD Radeon R9 M390 and Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 M390 and Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 video cards by all known characteristics in the categories: General information, API support, Memory, Technology support, Specifications, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions, requirements.
Analysis of video card performance by benchmarks: Geekbench — OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps), PassMark — G3D Mark, PassMark — G2D Mark.
nine0003
AMD Radeon R9 M390
versus
Intel IRIS Pro Graphics 6200
Advantages
reasons to select AMD Radeon R9 M390
- New VELEWN, DIFFICULATION DIFFERENCE
- performance in GEEEKBENCH Benchmark — OPENCH — OPENCL V. more: 20261 vs 4913
- 2.
5 times more performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) benchmark: 6227 vs 2475 - GFXBench 4.0 performance — Manhattan (Frames) about 29% faster: 1232 vs 958
- GFXBench 4.0 performance — T-Rex (Frames) about 45% faster: 3351 vs 2304
- GFX benchmark performance 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) 2.5 times more: 6227 vs 2475
- About 29% more performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps): 1232 vs 958
- Performance in GFXBench 4.0 — T- Rex (Fps) about 45% more: 3351 vs 2304
| Issue date | 09 June 2015 vs 5 September 2014 |
| Geekbench — OpenCL | 20261 vs 4913 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6227 vs 2475 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames) | 1232 vs 958 |
GFXBench 4. 0 — T-Rex (Frames) |
3351 vs 2304 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6227 vs 2475 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) | 1232 vs 958 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 vs 2304 |
Benchmark comparison
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 M390
GPU 2: Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200
| Geekbench — OpenCL |
|
|||
GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
nine0046 | ||
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|||
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) | nine0042 | |||
| GPU 1 | ||||
| GPU 2 |
| GPU 1 |
| GPU 2 |
nine0045
0 — Manhattan (Fps) | GPU 1 |
| GPU 2 |
| GPU 1 |
| GPU 2 |
| Name | AMD Radeon R9 M390 | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench — OpenCL | 20261 | 4913 |
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
44.394 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | ||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.028 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) | 73.782 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 241.868 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6227 | 2475 |
GFXBench 4. 0 — Manhattan (Frames) |
1232 | 958 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) | 3351 | 2304 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6227 | 2475 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) | 1232 | 958 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 | 2304 |
| PassMark — G3D Mark | 1441 | |
| PassMark — G2D Mark | 563 |
Feature comparison
| AMD Radeon R9 M390 | Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 | |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | GCN | Generation 8. 0 |
| Codename | Pitcairn | |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 300 Series | |
| Production date | 09 June 2015 | September 5, 2014 |
| Place in the ranking | 702 | |
| Type | Laptop | |
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4. 6 |
| Maximum memory size | 4GB | |
| Memory bus width | 256bit | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| DualGraphics | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| Switchable graphics | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
| Quick Sync | ||
| Boost core clock | 1150MHz | |
| Core clock | 300MHz | |
| Floating point performance | 883.
|