Iris Pro Graphics P6300 vs ATI Radeon HD 4350
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 4350 and Iris Pro Graphics P6300, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Iris Pro Graphics P6300 outperforms ATI HD 4350 by a whopping 950% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1271 | 698 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.35 | 18.94 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Generation 8.0 (2014−2015) |
| GPU code name | RV710 | Broadwell GT3e |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 30 September 2008 (16 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 cores | 80 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 800 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 242 million | 189 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.800 | 38.40 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.096 TFLOPS | 0.6144 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 6 |
| TMUs | 8 | 48 |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | IGP |
| Width | 1-slot | IGP |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no 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 type | DDR3 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 400 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 6.4 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | no 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 Connectors | 2x DisplayPort | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.1.80 |
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.
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.
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 HD | 7
−900%
| 70−75
+900%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−950%
|
21−24
+950%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−950%
|
21−24
+950%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−900%
|
70−75
+900%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−937%
|
280−290
+937%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−950%
|
21−24
+950%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−900%
|
140−150
+900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−900%
|
100−105
+900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−900%
|
70−75
+900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−900%
|
40−45
+900%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−937%
|
280−290
+937%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−900%
|
100−105
+900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−900%
|
70−75
+900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−900%
|
40−45
+900%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−937%
|
280−290
+937%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−900%
|
40−45
+900%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−900%
|
150−160
+900%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−950%
|
21−24
+950%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−950%
|
21−24
+950%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−950%
|
21−24
+950%
|
This is how ATI HD 4350 and Iris Pro Graphics P6300 compete in popular games:
- Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is 900% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.34 | 3.57 |
| Recency | 30 September 2008 | 5 September 2014 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 15 Watt |
Iris Pro Graphics P6300 has a 950% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 292.9% more advanced lithography process, and 33.3% lower power consumption.
The Iris Pro Graphics P6300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4350 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
