In Atomfall, the Iris Pro Graphics 5200 Mobile is slower than the Arc A350. We cannot compare value as at least one GPU is out of stock.
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 Mobile
No clear advantages
Arc A350
- Up to 30% faster in Atomfall – 35 vs 27 FPS
- Up to 30% faster in Atomfall
- Consumes up to 17% less energy – 25 vs 30 Watts
- Consumes up to 17% less energy
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 Mobile vs Arc A350: Comparison of performance and price
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 Mobile
May 27th, 2013
Average FPS
27 FPS
77%
Min 1% FPS
20 FPS
77%
Price, $
...
Value, $/FPS
...
All items are out of stock
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 Mobile vs Arc A350: Comparison of synthetic benchmarks
Performance Specifications
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 Mobile vs Arc A350: Comparison of core performance specifications
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 Mobile
May 27th, 2013
Memory
0 GB
0%
Memory Bandwidth
0 GB/s
0%
Pixel Fillrate
4.8 GPixel/s
10%
Texture Fillrate
48 GTexel/s
50%
FP32
768 GFLOPS
25%
Arc A350
Memory
4 GB
100%
Memory Bandwidth
124 GB/s
100%
Pixel Fillrate
48 GPixel/s
100%
Texture Fillrate
96 GTexel/s
100%
FP32
3.072 TFLOPS
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 Mobile May 27th, 2013 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Arc A350 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| May 27th, 2013 | Released | – |
| – | MSRP | – |
| HD Graphics-M (Haswell) | Generation | Alchemist (Arc 3) |
Integrated | Segment | Desktop |
| 30 W | Power Consumption | 25 W |
