Iris Plus Graphics 650 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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon R9 255 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.1% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (2 GB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Iris Plus Graphics 650.

Insight	Iris Plus Graphics 650	Radeon R9 255
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.1%)	✅Leading raw performance (+0.1%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Generation 9.5 (2016−2020))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100+%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

The Iris Plus Graphics 650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Iris Plus Graphics 650 holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $30), it costs 50% less, resulting in a 99.9% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Iris Plus Graphics 650	Radeon R9 255
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+99.9%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($15)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($30)

Performance Check

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Iris Plus Graphics 650 Benchmark Check

Radeon R9 255 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Iris Plus Graphics 650 and Radeon R9 255

Iris Plus Graphics 650

The Iris Plus Graphics 650 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in January 3 2017. It features the Generation 9.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 300 MHz to 1150 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 14 nm++ process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,500 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 Iris Plus Graphics 650 scores 1,500 and the Radeon R9 255 reaches 1,501 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Iris Plus Graphics 650 is built on Generation 9.5 while the Radeon R9 255 uses GCN 3.0, both on 14 nm++ vs 28 nm. Shader units: 384 (Iris Plus Graphics 650) vs 1,792 (Radeon R9 255). Raw compute: 0.8832 TFLOPS (Iris Plus Graphics 650) vs 3.29 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 255).

Feature	Iris Plus Graphics 650	Radeon R9 255
G3D Mark Score	1,500	1,501
Architecture	Generation 9.5	GCN 3.0
Process Node	14 nm++	28 nm
Shading Units	384	1792+367%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.8832 TFLOPS	3.29 TFLOPS+273%
ROPs	6	32+433%
TMUs	48	112+133%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Iris Plus Graphics 650	Radeon R9 255
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Iris Plus Graphics 650 comes with 0 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 255 has 2 GB. The Radeon R9 255 offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: System vs 128-bit.

Feature	Iris Plus Graphics 650	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 Iris Plus Graphics 650 draws 15W versus the Radeon R9 255's 190W — a 170.7% difference. The Iris Plus Graphics 650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 1W (Iris Plus Graphics 650) vs 400W (Radeon R9 255). Power connectors: Integrated vs 1x 6-pin.

Feature	Iris Plus Graphics 650	Radeon R9 255
TDP	15W-92%	190W
Recommended PSU	1W-100%	400W
Power Connector	Integrated	1x 6-pin
Length	0mm	—
Height	0mm	—
Slots	0	—
Temp (Load)	85	—
Perf/Watt	100.0+1166%	7.9

💰

Value Analysis

The Iris Plus Graphics 650 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the Radeon R9 255 launched at $139 and now averages $30. The Iris Plus Graphics 650 costs 50% less ($15 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 100.0 (Iris Plus Graphics 650) vs 50.0 (Radeon R9 255) — the Iris Plus Graphics 650 offers 100% better value. The Iris Plus Graphics 650 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2014).

Feature	Iris Plus Graphics 650	Radeon R9 255
MSRP	$0-100%	$139
Avg Price (30d)	$15-50%	$30
Performance per Dollar	100.0+100%	50.0
Codename	Kaby Lake GT3e	Tonga
Release	January 3 2017	September 2 2014
Ranking	#718	#365