Radeon HD 7640G vs Iris Pro Graphics 5200

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Pro Graphics 5200 and Radeon HD 7640G, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Iris Pro Graphics 5200
2013
System shared System shared + 128 MB eDRAM, 45 Watt
3.07
+158%

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 outperforms HD 7640G by a whopping 158% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7661061
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.022.33
ArchitectureGeneration 7.5 (2013)TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)
GPU code nameHaswell GT3eDevastator Lite
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date27 May 2013 (11 years ago)15 May 2012 (12 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 cores320256
Core clock speed200 MHz496 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHz685 MHz
Number of transistors392 million1,303 million
Manufacturing process technology22 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate48.0010.96
Floating-point processing power0.768 TFLOPS0.3507 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs4016

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
InterfaceRing BusIGP

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 shared + 128 MB eDRAMSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem sharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.34.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+N/A

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.

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 3.07
+158%
HD 7640G 1.19

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.

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 1184
+159%
HD 7640G 457

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.

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 1923
+193%
HD 7640G 656

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 8692
+234%
HD 7640G 2599

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 HD18
+200%
6−7
−200%
4K7
+250%
2−3
−250%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Hitman 3 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+21.9%
30−35
−21.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Hitman 3 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+72.7%
10−12
−72.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+21.9%
30−35
−21.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Hitman 3 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+27.3%
10−12
−27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+21.9%
30−35
−21.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+260%
5−6
−260%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

This is how Iris Pro Graphics 5200 and HD 7640G compete in popular games:

  • Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is 200% faster in 1080p
  • Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is 250% faster in 4K

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is 1500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is ahead in 45 tests (96%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.07 1.19
Recency 27 May 2013 15 May 2012
Chip lithography 22 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 35 Watt

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 has a 158% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 45.5% more advanced lithography process.

HD 7640G, on the other hand, has 28.6% lower power consumption.

The Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7640G 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.


Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
Iris Pro Graphics 5200
AMD Radeon HD 7640G
Radeon HD 7640G

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.


2.8 163 votes

Rate Iris Pro Graphics 5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 166 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7640G 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.