Iris Plus Graphics vs Radeon R9 270

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 270 and Iris Plus Graphics, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 270
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
11.16
+137%

R9 270 outperforms Iris Plus Graphics by a whopping 137% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking417645
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.88no data
Power efficiency5.4522.95
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Generation 11.0 (2019−2021)
GPU code nameCuracaoIce Lake GT2
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 November 2013 (10 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$179 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1280512
Boost clock speed925 MHz1000 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate74.0032.00
Floating-point processing power2.368 TFLOPS1.024 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs8032

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x1
Length210 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno 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 amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speedno dataSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/sno 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-

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.

R9 270 11.16
+137%
Iris Plus Graphics 4.70

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.

R9 270 4306
+138%
Iris Plus Graphics 1813

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.16 4.70
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 15 Watt

R9 270 has a 137.4% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Plus Graphics, on the other hand, has a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 900% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 270 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Plus Graphics 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.


AMD Radeon R9 270
Radeon R9 270
Intel Iris Plus Graphics
Iris Plus Graphics

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.


3.9 595 votes

Rate Radeon R9 270 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 346 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 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.