Iris Plus Graphics 645 vs Radeon R9 M395

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M395 and Iris Plus Graphics 645, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 M395
2015
4 GB GDDR5
12.73
+186%

R9 M395 outperforms Iris Plus Graphics 645 by a whopping 186% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking390661
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data20.68
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameno dataCoffee Lake GT3e
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date9 June 2015 (9 years ago)7 October 2019 (5 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 cores1792384
Core clock speed834 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1050 MHz
Number of transistors5000 Millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)no data15 Watt
Texture fill rateno data50.40
Floating-point processing powerno data0.8064 TFLOPS
ROPsno data6
TMUsno data48

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
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
Interfaceno dataRing Bus

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 width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1250 MHzSystem 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 Connectorsno dataPortable Device Dependent
Eyefinity+-

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
TrueAudio+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-
Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed3.0
Vulkan+1.3
Mantle+-

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 M395 12.73
+186%
Iris Plus Graphics 645 4.45

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 M395 4911
+186%
Iris Plus Graphics 645 1715

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.

R9 M395 8656
+190%
Iris Plus Graphics 645 2985

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R9 M395 6819
+260%
Iris Plus Graphics 645 1893

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 HD70−75
+180%
25
−180%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+186%
7−8
−186%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−33
+173%
10−12
−173%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+356%
9−10
−356%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+189%
9−10
−189%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+186%
7−8
−186%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+218%
10−12
−218%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+250%
24−27
−250%
Hitman 3 24−27
+167%
9−10
−167%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+148%
27−30
−148%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+438%
8−9
−438%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+180%
14−16
−180%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+67.4%
40−45
−67.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−33
+173%
10−12
−173%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+356%
9−10
−356%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+189%
9−10
−189%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+186%
7−8
−186%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+218%
10−12
−218%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+250%
24−27
−250%
Hitman 3 24−27
+167%
9−10
−167%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+148%
27−30
−148%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+438%
8−9
−438%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+180%
14−16
−180%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+100%
16−18
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+67.4%
40−45
−67.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−33
+173%
10−12
−173%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+189%
9−10
−189%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+186%
7−8
−186%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+250%
24−27
−250%
Hitman 3 24−27
+167%
9−10
−167%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+148%
27−30
−148%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+180%
14−16
−180%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+100%
16−18
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+67.4%
40−45
−67.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+257%
7−8
−257%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+233%
6−7
−233%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+1500%
4−5
−1500%
Hitman 3 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+189%
9−10
−189%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+200%
7−8
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+200%
7−8
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+220%
24−27
−220%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Hitman 3 9−10 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+190%
21−24
−190%
Metro Exodus 12−14 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%

This is how R9 M395 and Iris Plus Graphics 645 compete in popular games:

  • R9 M395 is 180% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 M395 is 1500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, R9 M395 surpassed Iris Plus Graphics 645 in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.73 4.45
Recency 9 June 2015 7 October 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm

R9 M395 has a 186.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Plus Graphics 645, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R9 M395 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Plus Graphics 645 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 M395
Radeon R9 M395
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645
Iris Plus Graphics 645

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.


3.3 21 vote

Rate Radeon R9 M395 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 116 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 645 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.