Intel Iris Pro (5200) Vs Intel Iris Graphic 6100

[pmcthegamerz]

Question is in the title, what is the difference between these two graphic cards in performance ?

Wich one would be the best for games ?
Wich one would be the best for video editing?

I got to choose between the
rMBP 15" at 1999 (Iris pro 5200) on bestbuy or the new rMBP 13" at 1799 (Iris Graphic 6100)

Considering also that one has 2 core and the second one 4 core...

 

[Samuelsan2001]

The 15 inch will be better for both those things with both the CPU and GPU being far better for both those tasks, maybe the CPU more than the graphics for video editing and the reverse for gaming.

 

[uptempos]

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Pro-Graphics-5200.90965.0.html

They are both in Class 2..but you can see iris pro 5200 is definitely higher on the list than the 6100

 

[Atomic Walrus]

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Pro-Graphics-5200.90965.0.html

They are both in Class 2..but you can see iris pro 5200 is definitely higher on the list than the 6100

I'm not sure if that means anything yet with no benchmarks listed for the 6100. Of course just based on thermal constraints the 6100 is going to be limited in CPU-heavy situations (you'll hit TDP and one or both will start to throttle).

But for the OP: Best case scenario the 6100 is roughly equal to the 5200, but the 15" will still win in the real world because it can clear more heat and won't throttle as quickly (and the extra cores can give it an advantage when CPU is the bottleneck).

 

[thunng8]

The biggest difference is iris pro has 128mb edram which alleviates the memory bandwidth bottleneck for graphics performance

My guess is iris pro 5200 will still be at least 50% faster than iris 6100.

 

[thundersteele]

The Iris 6100 has 48 execution units where the Iris 5100 had 40 - naively I would expect a 20% performance increase from this.

The Iris Pro 5200 has the same 40 EUs as the 5100, but the additional on-die RAM makes it between 50% and 100% faster in benchmarks and in gaming performance. It is not even close.

So, at best the Iris 6100 can get close to the 5200 in some applications, but I wouldn't count on that. Add in the 4 cores, larger screen, 16 GB of RAM (?) the 15'' should be the clear winner.

 

[exexs]

I would love to see the results in benchmarks!

Of course the 15" with Iris Pro will be faster, but how much faster?

If you consider the price, (in Europe) the base 13" is 1449€ and the base 15" is 2249€, the price increase is about 55% +-

Are the performances of the Iris Pro over the 6100 about 55% ? That's the one question I would like to know the answer to!

(And of course there are many other reasons to upgrade or not upgrade for a 15" other than graphics, but let put these aside in this thread which is dealing about graphics)

 

[mebpenguin]

I've been thinking about this a lot too

I've come up with the following reasoning:

If you check out this article on the Broadwell mini PC, you'll see that the graphics performance of the HD6000 is about 20 to 30 percent better than the HD5000. The HD6100 is likely to be about ten percent faster than that, as we're talking about the exact same hardware just clocked about 10% faster.

Using the Unigine Heaven benchmark, we can estimate the following:
12.1 fps (HD5000 benchmark) x 1.25 x 1.1 = 16.6 fps

That's probably what you can expect from the HD6100 on the new 13 rMPB.

The HD5200 on the 15 inch, however, benchmarks at 21.9 fps, so it's still significantly better than the HD6100. As has been mentioned previously, the 128MB of eDRAM on chip makes a huge difference, as is mentioned in the article above as well.

 

[barefeats]

The 15" MacBook Pro Retina's Intel Iris Pro 5200 is faster.

LuxMark 2 OpenCL Sala Scene
Intel Iris Pro 5200 = 729 Ksamples/sec
Intel Iris 6100 = 287 KSamples/sec

GTXBench OpenGL T-Rex 1080p Off-Screen
Intel Iris Pro 5200 = 156 FPS
Intel Iris 6100 = 92.8 FPS

GPUTest FurMark OpenGL at 1280x720 no AA
Intel Iris Pro 5200 = 30 FPS
Intel Iris 6100 = 12 FPS