In Rust, the Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is quite a bit slower than the Arc A750. We cannot compare value as at least one GPU is out of stock.
Iris Pro Graphics 5200
- Consumes up to 80% less energy – 45 vs 225 Watts
- Consumes up to 80% less energy
Arc A750
- Up to 79% faster in Rust – 165 vs 92 FPS
- Up to 79% faster in Rust
- Is 9 years and 4 months newer – Oct 12, 2022 vs Jun 03, 2013
- Is 9 years and 4 months newer
Rust FPS Calculator
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 vs Arc A750: Comparison of performance and price
Iris Pro Graphics 5200
Jun 3rd, 2013
Average FPS
92 FPS
56%
Min 1% FPS
69 FPS
56%
Price, $
...
Value, $/FPS
...
All items are out of stock
Arc A750
Oct 12th, 2022
Average FPS
165 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
123 FPS
100%
Price, $
$264.93
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.6/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 vs Arc A750: Comparison of synthetic benchmarks
Performance Specifications
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 vs Arc A750: Comparison of core performance specifications
Iris Pro Graphics 5200
Jun 3rd, 2013
Memory
0 GB
0%
Memory Bandwidth
0 GB/s
0%
Pixel Fillrate
4.6 GPixel/s
2%
Texture Fillrate
46 GTexel/s
9%
FP32
736 GFLOPS
4%
Arc A750
Oct 12th, 2022
Memory
8 GB
100%
Memory Bandwidth
512 GB/s
100%
Pixel Fillrate
268.8 GPixel/s
100%
Texture Fillrate
537.6 GTexel/s
100%
FP32
17.2 TFLOPS
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Iris Pro Graphics 5200 Jun 3rd, 2013 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Arc A750 Oct 12th, 2022 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jun 3rd, 2013 | Released | Oct 12th, 2022 |
| – | MSRP | $289.00 |
| HD Graphics (Haswell) | Generation | Alchemist (Arc 7) |
Integrated | Segment | Desktop |
45 W | Power Consumption | 225 W |
