Iris Plus Graphics 940 vs Radeon Pro 560

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking481not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency8.38no data
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Generation 11.0 (2019−2021)
GPU code namePolaris 21Ice Lake GT2
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date18 April 2017 (7 years ago)no data (2024 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 cores1024384
Core clock speed907 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1000 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate58.0524.00
Floating-point processing power1.858 TFLOPS0.768 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs6424

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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x1
Widthno dataIGP
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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1270 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth81.28 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 15 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics 940 has a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Pro 560 and Iris Plus Graphics 940. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 560 is a mobile workstation card while Iris Plus Graphics 940 is a desktop 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 Pro 560
Radeon Pro 560
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 940
Iris Plus Graphics 940

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.


4 112 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 560 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 82 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 940 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.