In Deathloop, the Iris Pro Graphics 5200 Mobile is quite a bit 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 75% faster in Deathloop – 84 vs 48 FPS
- Up to 75% faster in Deathloop
- Consumes up to 17% less energy – 25 vs 30 Watts
- Consumes up to 17% less energy
Deathloop 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
48 FPS
57%
Min 1% FPS
36 FPS
57%
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 |
