Iris Pro Graphics 6200 vs Radeon R9 255

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 vs Radeon R9 255 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 vs Radeon R9 255: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200

2014

Why buy it

✅Draws 15W instead of 190W, a 175W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with Unknown vs 2 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2014 hardware with Unknown of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 10.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $139 MSRP).

Radeon R9 255

2014

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 10.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($139 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅100+% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (2 GB vs Unknown).
✅Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is already obsolete for modern gaming, so Radeon R9 255 is the less risky modern option long term.

Trade-offs

❌2014 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌1166.7% higher power demand at 190W vs 15W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 2.5% in PassMark G3D (1,538 vs 1,501), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

Radeon R9 255 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 2 GB vs Unknown of VRAM and the newer upscaling stack, FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Radeon R9 255 makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup. Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 still makes more sense if max raw gaming performance matters more than value.

Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 vs Radeon R9 255 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in September 5 2014. It features the Generation 8.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 300 MHz to 1100 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,538 points.

Radeon R9 255

The Radeon R9 255 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in September 2 2014. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 918 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 190W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,501 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 1,538 and the Radeon R9 255 reaches 1,501 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is built on Generation 8.0 while the Radeon R9 255 uses GCN 3.0, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 384 (Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200) vs 1,792 (Radeon R9 255). Raw compute: 0.8448 TFLOPS (Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200) vs 3.29 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 255).

Feature	Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200	Radeon R9 255
G3D Mark Score	1,538+2%	1,501
Architecture	Generation 8.0	GCN 3.0
Process Node	14 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	384	1792+367%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.8448 TFLOPS	3.29 TFLOPS+289%
ROPs	6	32+433%
TMUs	48	112+133%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200	Radeon R9 255
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 has 0 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 255 carries 2 GB. Radeon R9 255 gives you 100+% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is System on the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 and 128-bit on the Radeon R9 255.

Feature	Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200	Radeon R9 255
VRAM Capacity	Shared System RAM	2 GB
Memory Type	Shared	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	System	Unknown
Bus Width	System	128-bit

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 draws 15W versus the Radeon R9 255's 190W — a 170.7% difference. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 1W (Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200) vs 400W (Radeon R9 255). Power connectors: Integrated vs 1x 6-pin.

Feature	Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200	Radeon R9 255
TDP	15W-92%	190W
Recommended PSU	1W-100%	400W
Power Connector	Integrated	1x 6-pin
Perf/Watt	102.5+1197%	7.9

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 came in at $0, while the Radeon R9 255 launched at $139. On MSRP, Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 was 100+% cheaper ($139 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): Infinity (Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200) vs 10.8 (Radeon R9 255) — the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 offers Infinity% better value.

Feature	Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200	Radeon R9 255
MSRP	$0-100%	$139
Performance per Dollar	Infinity	10.8
Codename	Broadwell GT3e	Tonga
Release	September 5 2014	September 2 2014
Ranking	#763	#365

Search Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 on Amazon

Search Radeon R9 255 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.