Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) vs Iris Pro Graphics P580

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Pro Graphics P580 and Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Iris Pro Graphics P580
2015
64 GB DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4, 15 Watt
5.24
+706%

Iris Pro Graphics P580 outperforms R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) by a whopping 706% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6151189
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency24.36no data
ArchitectureGeneration 9.0 (2015−2016)GCN 1.1 (2014)
GPU code nameSkylake GT4eBeema/Mullins
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 September 2015 (9 years ago)29 April 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 cores576128
Core clock speed350 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors189 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm+28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rate75.60no data
Floating-point processing power1.21 TFLOPSno data
ROPs9no data
TMUs72no data

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).

InterfaceRing Busno 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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4no data
Maximum RAM amount64 GBno data
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno 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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependentno data

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 (12_1)12 (FL 12_0)
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL3.0no data
Vulkan1.3-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7 0−1
Battlefield 5 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+725%
4−5
−725%
Hitman 3 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+56.7%
30−33
−56.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7 0−1
Battlefield 5 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+725%
4−5
−725%
Hitman 3 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+80%
10−11
−80%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+56.7%
30−33
−56.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+725%
4−5
−725%
Hitman 3 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+80%
10−11
−80%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+56.7%
30−33
−56.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Hitman 3 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+1550%
2−3
−1550%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4 0−1
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Iris Pro Graphics P580 is 1550% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Iris Pro Graphics P580 surpassed R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) in all 35 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.24 0.65
Recency 1 September 2015 29 April 2014
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm

Iris Pro Graphics P580 has a 706.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Iris Pro Graphics P580 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) 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 P580
Iris Pro Graphics P580
AMD Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L)
Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L)

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.


3.8 4 votes

Rate Iris Pro Graphics P580 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 4 votes

Rate Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) 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.