Notebookcheck Logo

Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655

Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655

The Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655 (GT3e) is a processor graphics card announced in September 2017. As the successor to the Intel Iris Graphics 650 (Kaby Lake), the Iris Plus Graphics 655 is used for 28-Watt Coffee Lake-U models. The biggest difference is the doubled eDRAM-cache at 128 MB. There should not be any big changes compared to the Iris Graphics 650.

The so called GT3e version of the Kaby Lake GPU still has 48 Execution Units (EUs), which can reach up to 1200 MHz (previously 1100 MHz) depending on the model. Besides eDRAM cache, the Iris 655 can also access the system memory (2x 64 Bit DDR3L-2133/DDR4-2400) via processor interface.

Compared to the Iris Plus 640 from the 15-Watt models, the Iris 655 only has a slightly higher maximum clock as well as almost twice the TDP, which allows a better utilization of the Turbo Boost potential.

Performance

The exact performance of the Iris Plus Graphics 655 depends on the CPU model, because maximum clock as well as the size of the L3 cache can differ a bit. The system memory (DDR3/DDR4) will influence the performance as well.

The fastest chips are high-clocked Core i7 models like the Core i7-8559U. Depending on the game, the Iris Plus 655 will probably be on par with a dedicated GeForce 930M or GeForce 940MX and can handle smooth gameplay in modern titles in low up to medium settings.

Features

The reworked video engine now fully supports hardware decoding of H.265/HEVC videos. Contrary to Skylake, however, Kaby Lake can now also decode H.265/HEVC Main 10 with a 10-bit color depth as well as Google's VP9 codec. The video output is possible via DP 1.2/eDP 1.3 (up to 3840 x 2160 @60 Hz), whereas HDMI is also supported in the older 1.4a standard. An HDMI 2.0 output can be added via converter from DisplayPort. The GPU can drive up to three displays simultaneously.

Power Consumption

The Iris Plus Graphics 655 is used for 28-Watt processor and therefore small/medium-sized notebooks.

Gen. 9.5 Series

Iris Plus Graphics 655 48 @ 0.3 - 1.2 GHz
Iris Plus Graphics 650 compare 48 @ 0.3 - 1.1 GHz64/128 Bit
Iris Plus Graphics 645 compare 48 @ 0.3 - 1.15 GHz
Iris Plus Graphics 640 compare 48 @ 0.3 - 1.05 GHz64/128 Bit
UHD Graphics 630 compare 24 @ 0.3 - 1.15 GHz64/128 Bit
UHD Graphics P630 compare 24 @ 0.3 - 1.2 GHz64/128 Bit
HD Graphics 630 compare 24 @ 0.3 - 1.15 GHz64/128 Bit
HD Graphics P630 compare 24 64/128 Bit
UHD Graphics 620 compare 24 @ 0.3 - 1.15 GHz
HD Graphics 620 compare 24 @ 0.3 - 1.05 GHz64/128 Bit
UHD Graphics 617 compare 24 @ 0.3 - 1.15 GHz64/128 Bit
UHD Graphics 615 compare 24 @ 0.3 - 1 GHz64/128 Bit
HD Graphics 615 compare 24 @ 0.3 - 1.05 GHz64/128 Bit
CodenameKaby Lake GT3e
ArchitectureGen. 9.5 Kaby Lake
Pipelines48 - unified
Core Speed300 - 1200 (Boost) MHz
Memory TypeDDR3/DDR4
Shared Memoryyes
APIDirectX 12_1, OpenGL 4.5
technology14 nm
FeaturesQuickSync
Date of Announcement01.09.2017
CPU in Iris Plus Graphics 655GPU Base SpeedGPU Boost / Turbo
Intel Core i7-8559U4 x 2700 MHz, 28 W300 MHz1200 MHz
Intel Core i5-8269U4 x 2600 MHz, 28 W300 MHz1100 MHz
Intel Core i5-8279U4 x 2400 MHz, 28 W300 MHz1150 MHz
min. - max.300 MHz1050 - 1200 MHz

Benchmarks

Performance Rating - 3DMark 11 + Fire Strike + Time Spy
0.9 pt (3%)
3DMark - 3DMark Time Spy Score
min: 348     avg: 647     median: 684 (2%)     max: 722 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Time Spy Graphics
min: 301     avg: 570     median: 604.5 (2%)     max: 633 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Score
min: 6769     avg: 10798     median: 11622 (12%)     max: 13037 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics
min: 6498     avg: 13736     median: 14343 (4%)     max: 16698 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Score
min: 852     avg: 1703     median: 1850 (3%)     max: 2040 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics
min: 920     avg: 1836     median: 1983 (2%)     max: 2260 Points
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance Score
min: 1548     avg: 2942     median: 3180.5 (4%)     max: 3349 Points
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance GPU
min: 1365     avg: 2707     median: 2894 (2%)     max: 3081 Points
3DMark Vantage
3DM Vant. Perf. total +
3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX +
3DMark 06 3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024 +
3DMark 06
min: 17176     avg: 17885     median: 17885 (24%)     max: 18594 Points
SPECviewperf 12
specvp12 sw-03 +
specvp12 snx-02 +
specvp12 showcase-01 +
specvp12 mediacal-01 +
specvp12 maya-04 +
specvp12 energy-01 +
specvp12 creo-01 +
specvp12 catia-04 +
specvp12 3dsmax-05 +
SPECviewperf 13 specvp13 sw-04 +
specvp13 snx-03 +
specvp13 showcase-02 +
specvp13 medical-02 +
specvp13 maya-05 +
specvp13 energy-02 +
specvp13 creo-02 +
specvp13 catia-05 +
specvp13 3dsmax-06 +
SPECviewperf 2020 specvp2020 solidworks-05 4k +
specvp2020 snx-04 4k +
specvp2020 medical-03 4k +
specvp2020 maya-06 4k +
specvp2020 energy-03 4k +
specvp2020 creo-03 4k +
specvp2020 catia-06 4k +
specvp2020 3dsmax-07 4k +
Cinebench R10 Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit) +
Cinebench R11.5 Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64 Bit +
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit +
Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit
min: 33.91     avg: 67     median: 74 (4%)     max: 88 fps
Cinebench R15 OpenGL Ref. Match 64 Bit +
Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 OpenGL Ref. Match 64 Bit
min: 97.8     avg: 98.1     median: 97.8 (98%)     max: 99.3 %
GFXBench 3.1 - GFXBench Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
min: 43.1     avg: 2387     median: 2387.1 (50%)     max: 4731 fps
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
GFXBench T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 +
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 - GFXBench T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16
min: 199.6     avg: 6375     median: 6375.3 (51%)     max: 12551 fps
Power Consumption - Furmark Stress Test Power Consumption - external Monitor *
min: 28.9     avg: 37.4     median: 39.2 (6%)     max: 42.4 Watt
0510152025303540455055Tooltip
Power Consumption - The Witcher 3 Power Consumption - external Monitor *
min: 35.3     avg: 40.6     median: 39.4 (6%)     max: 47.2 Watt
05101520253035404550Tooltip
Emissions Witcher 3 Fan Noise +
- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance

Game Benchmarks

The following benchmarks stem from our benchmarks of review laptops. The performance depends on the used graphics memory, clock rate, processor, system settings, drivers, and operating systems. So the results don't have to be representative for all laptops with this GPU. For detailed information on the benchmark results, click on the fps number.

F1 2021

F1 2021

2021
low 1280x720
44.6  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
21.6  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
16.4  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
10.2  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
F1 2020

F1 2020

2020
low 1280x720
40.7  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
19.1  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
14.5  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
9.6  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1280x720
54.8  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
17.3  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
11.6  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1280x720
29.1  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
16.2  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
14.1  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
6.6  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
high 1920x1080
59.8  fps    + Compare
4K 3840x2160
27.2  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1280x720
15.8  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
GRID 2019

GRID 2019

2019
low 1280x720
36.3 (!)  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
20.9 (!)  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
FIFA 20

FIFA 20

2019
low 1280x720
92  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
55.9  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
46.3  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
34.9  fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
26.5  fps    + Compare
4K 3840x2160
13.6  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1280x720
22.5 23.5 ~ 23 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
10.2 10.4 ~ 10 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
6.4 6.7 ~ 7 fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
Additional Benchmarks
Very Low Overall Quality (DX11) 1920x1080
13
15.5
Control

Control

2019
low 1280x720
25.4 (!)  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
F1 2019

F1 2019

2019
low 1280x720
51.2  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
21.9  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
19.3  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1280x720
56.7  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
18.5  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
10.5  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
Anno 1800

Anno 1800

2019
low 1280x720
30.2  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1280x720
64  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
22.8  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
Anthem

Anthem

2019
low 1280x720
16.6  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1280x720
21 22 ~ 22 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
11 11 ~ 11 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
10  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
9  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1280x720
18.3 20.1 ~ 19 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
10.1  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
7.4  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1280x720
13 18 ~ 16 fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1280x720
25  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
0 (!)  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
FIFA 19

FIFA 19

2018
low 1280x720
82  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
45.8  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
40.3  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
36.7  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1280x720
19 20.5 22 23.5 ~ 21 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
11 13 ~ 12 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
8 10.1 ~ 9 fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
Additional Benchmarks
Lowest Preset 1920x1080
14
16.6
Strange Brigade

Strange Brigade

2018
low 1280x720
41.4  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
17.6  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
16.9  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
14.5  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
F1 2018

F1 2018

2018
low 1280x720
45  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
23  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
17  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
12 12 ~ 12 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1280x720
30.9  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
Far Cry 5

Far Cry 5

2018
low 1280x720
20 22 23 ~ 22 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
10 11 11 ~ 11 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
10  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
9  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
Additional Benchmarks
Low Preset TAA 1920x1080
13
12
World of Tanks enCore

World of Tanks enCore

2018
low 1366x768
15.7 250 ~ 133 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
40.3  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1280x720
13.8 21.2 22.4 25.3 26.8 32.6 42.8 ~ 26 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
9.8 15 15.3 18 18.4 23.3 29.5 ~ 18 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
8.6 12.3 13.4 15.9 16 19.8 25.1 ~ 16 fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1280x720
9.1 14.7 15.6 16.6 16.9 17 17.3 18.1 ~ 16 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
7.9 8.8 9.1 9.7 ~ 9 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
5.3 6 6.1 6.6 ~ 6 fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
Fortnite

Fortnite

2018
low 1280x720
51.5  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
21.6  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1280x720
30  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
18  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
14  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
9  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1280x720
128  fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
125  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
113  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
57.8  fps    + Compare
4K 3820x2160
34.4  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1280x720
78 97 133.3 ~ 103 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
40.6 46 59.1 ~ 49 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
32.7 36 38.8 ~ 36 fps    + Compare
» With most tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
Additional Benchmarks
Performance 1920x1080
92
60
low 1280x720
20.4 22.7 ~ 22 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
10.2  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
For Honor

For Honor

2017
low 1280x720
0 (!) 41.3 ~ 21 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
16.1  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1280x720
28.7  fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
21.1  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
Overwatch

Overwatch

2016
low 1280x720
91  fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
68  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
29.9  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
18.2  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1280x768
19.4  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
11.3  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
10.5  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1280x720
34.2  fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
21.2  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1024x768
25.9 39.2 ~ 33 fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
17.6 22.3 ~ 20 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
10.8  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
8.9  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1024x768
75.8  fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
0 (!)  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1280x720
51.4 84 86.8 87.9 92.6 94.4 95 98 ~ 86 fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
34.6 37.1 57 63 64 66 68 77.9 ~ 58 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
15.8 25.3 27.8 31.9 32.4 33.3 34.5 34.7 ~ 29 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
13.4 22.7 24.5 27.7 28.1 28.1 29.9 30.4 ~ 26 fps    + Compare
4K 3840x2160
11.6 12.2 ~ 12 fps    + Compare
» With most tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1024x768
23.2 24.7 27.4 27.9 ~ 26 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1366x768
14.6 17.8 ~ 16 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
10.1 10.9 ~ 11 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
5.6 5.6 ~ 6 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
Additional Benchmarks
Medium Graphics & Postprocessing 1920x1080
12.3
GTA V

GTA V

2015
low 1024x768
57 61 68 ~ 62 fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
51.2 51.8 62.1 ~ 55 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
13.7 14.3 15.8 ~ 15 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
5.2 5.5 6.2 ~ 6 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
4.2  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
Additional Benchmarks
Normal/Off 4xAF 1920x1080
45.5
38.2
Lowest Settings possible 1920x1080
48.1
39.9
low 1280x720
78.4 116.6 ~ 98 fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
54.3 64.8 ~ 60 fps    + Compare
high 1366x768
49.4 55 ~ 52 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
15.5 17 ~ 16 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
high 1366x768
93.7  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
49.6  fps    + Compare
4K 3820x2160
12.4  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
lowmed.highultraQHD4K
F1 202144.621.616.410.2
F1 202040.719.114.59.64
Gears Tactics54.817.311.6
Doom Eternal
Escape from Tarkov29.116.214.16.59
Hearthstone59.827.2
Red Dead Redemption 215.8
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2019
GRID 201936.320.9
Ghost Recon Breakpoint
FIFA 209255.946.334.926.513.6
Borderlands 323107
Control25.4
F1 201951.221.919.3
Total War: Three Kingdoms56.718.510.5
Rage 224.5
Anno 180030.2
The Division 235
Dirt Rally 2.06422.8
Anthem16.6
Far Cry New Dawn2211109
Metro Exodus1910.17.41
Battlefield V19.9
Call of Duty Black Ops 4
Assassin´s Creed Odyssey16
Forza Horizon 425
FIFA 198245.840.336.7
Shadow of the Tomb Raider21129
Strange Brigade41.417.616.914.5
F1 201845231712
The Crew 230.9
Far Cry 52211109
World of Tanks enCore13340.3
X-Plane 11.11261816
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark1696
Fortnite51.521.6
Assassin´s Creed Origins13
Middle-earth: Shadow of War3018149
Team Fortress 212812511357.834.4
Rocket League1034936
Ghost Recon Wildlands2210.2
For Honor2116.1
Deus Ex Mankind Divided28.721.1
Overwatch916829.918.2
Ashes of the Singularity19.411.310.5
The Division34.221.2
Rise of the Tomb Raider332010.88.9
Rainbow Six Siege75.8
Dota 2 Reborn8658292612
The Witcher 32616116
GTA V62551564.17
BioShock Infinite98605216
Counter-Strike: GO93.749.612.4
< 30 fps
< 60 fps
< 120 fps
≥ 120 fps
21
15
9
2
26
6
2
1
22
5
2
14
4

2


4
1

For more games that might be playable and a list of all games and graphics cards visit our Gaming List

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2024, 2023
v1.26
log 17. 22:56:56

#0 no ids found in url (should be separated by "_") +0s ... 0s

#1 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#2 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Sat, 16 Mar 2024 05:38:32 +0100 +0.001s ... 0.001s

#3 composed specs +0.045s ... 0.046s

#4 did output specs +0s ... 0.046s

#5 start showIntegratedCPUs +0s ... 0.046s

#6 getting avg benchmarks for device 8828 +0.032s ... 0.078s

#7 got single benchmarks 8828 +0.024s ... 0.102s

#8 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.102s

#9 min, max, avg, median took s +0.897s ... 0.999s

#10 before gaming benchmark output +0s ... 0.999s

#11 Got 248 rows for game benchmarks. +0.024s ... 1.023s

#12 composed SQL query for gamebenchmarks +0s ... 1.023s

#13 got data and put it in $dataArray +0.033s ... 1.057s

#14 benchmarks composed for output. +1.255s ... 2.312s

#15 return log +0.037s ... 2.349s

Notebook reviews with Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655 graphics card

ACEMagician ACE-CK10-8259U

ACEMagician ACE-CK10-8259U mini PC review - quiet office PC with space for up to three SSDs

The ACEMagician ACE-CK10-8259U is a small office PC based on a native 4-core processor. However, its processor is still part of the Coffee Lake generation, whic...
Intel Core i5-8259U | Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655 | | 449 g
Geekom Mini IT8 SFF desktop hands-on

Geekom Mini IT8 SFF desktop hands-on

The Geekom Mini IT8 is a compact desktop. Despite its tiny footprint, it packs some decent power thanks to its quad-core CPU and Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655 iG...
Intel Core i5-8259U | Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655 | | 586 g
Beelink SEi8 review: Uncommon Core i3-8109U for a new mini PC

Beelink SEi8 review: Uncommon Core i3-8109U for a new mini PC

If you want something faster than Celeron or Atom without needing to overpay for the latest Core i5 or Core i7 solutions, then this affordable Beelink SEi8 may ...
Intel Core i3-8109U | Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655 | | 346 g
Chuwi CoreBook X Pro laptop review: 120 Hz display for cheap

Chuwi CoreBook X Pro laptop review: 120 Hz display for cheap

The CoreBook X Pro is the least expensive 15.6-inch laptop you can find with a 120 Hz panel. The catch, however, is you'll have to deal with substantial cut cor...
Intel Core i5-8259U | Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655 | 15.60" | 1.8 kg
Chuwi CoreBook X Laptop Review: Like a Huawei MateBook, But Cheaper

Chuwi CoreBook X Laptop Review: Like a Huawei MateBook, But Cheaper

The CoreBook X is a good solution for those who want to maximize display quality and colors for a budget price. Nonetheless, there are a bunch of smaller detail...
Intel Core i5-8259U | Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655 | 14.00" | 1.5 kg

GMK NucBox 2: Intel Core i5-8259U, 0.4 kg
  Review » GMK NucBox 2 Mini PC Review: Reasonably Priced with Good Upgradeability

Apple MacBook Pro 13 2019 i5 4TB3: Intel Core i5-8279U, 13.30", 1.4 kg
  Review » Apple MacBook Pro 13 2019 laptop review: Good performance, but no real innovation

Intel NUC8i7BEH Asura NVMe SSD: Intel Core i7-8559U, 0.7 kg
  Review » Asura Genesis Xtreme M.2 NVMe SSD vs. Samsung SSD 970 Pro

Intel NUC8i7BE: Intel Core i7-8559U, 0.7 kg
  Review » Intel NUC Kit NUC8i7BEH (i7-8559U) Mini PC Review

Apple MacBook Pro 13 2018 Touchbar i5: Intel Core i5-8259U, 13.30", 1.4 kg
  Review » Apple MacBook Pro 13 2018 (Touch Bar, i5) Laptop Review

Chuwi CoreBook X Pro: Intel Core i5-8259U, 15.60", 1.8 kg
  External Review » Chuwi CoreBook X Pro

Chuwi CoreBook X: Intel Core i5-8259U, 14.00", 1.5 kg
  External Review » Chuwi CoreBook X

LG Gram 15Z90N-V-AR53B: Intel Core i5-1035G7, 15.60", 1.1 kg
  External Review » LG Gram 15Z90N-V-AR53B

Apple MacBook Pro 13 2019 i5 4TB3: Intel Core i5-8279U, 13.30", 1.4 kg
  External Review » Apple MacBook Pro 13 2019 i5 4TB3

Apple MacBook Pro 13 2019-Z0WQ: unknown, 13.30", 1.4 kg
  External Review » Apple MacBook Pro 13 2019-Z0WQ

Apple MacBook Pro 13 2018 Touchbar i7: Intel Core i7-8559U, 13.30", 1.4 kg
  External Review » Apple MacBook Pro 13 2018 Touchbar i7

Apple MacBook Pro 13 2018 Touchbar i5: Intel Core i5-8259U, 13.30", 1.4 kg
  External Review » Apple MacBook Pro 13 2018 Touchbar i5

Chuwi CoreBook X Pro: Intel Core i5-8259U, 15.60", 1.8 kg
   » Official Chuwi CoreBook X Pro page is misleading and embarrassingly full of errors

Chuwi CoreBook X: Intel Core i5-8259U, 14.00", 1.5 kg
   » The $500 USD Chuwi CoreBook X is actually not a terrible Huawei MateBook X knockoff

GMK NucBox 2: Intel Core i5-8259U, 0.4 kg
   » GMK NucBox and NucBox 2 mini PCs are 20 percent off for Amazon Prime Day

   » GMK NucBox 2 mini PC is only $399 USD for a limited time with 8 GB RAM and 256 GB NVMe SSD

Apple MacBook Pro 13 2019 i5 4TB3: Intel Core i5-8279U, 13.30", 1.4 kg
   » The Apple MacBook Pro 13 doesn't offer any innovations, but it's still a very good subnotebook with a lot of power

Please share our article, every link counts!

» Comparison of GPUs
Detailed list of all laptop GPUs sorted by class and performance.

» Benchmark List
Sort and restrict laptop GPUs based on performance in synthetic benchmarks.

» Notebook Gaming List
Playable games for each graphics card and their average FPS results.

Class 0

Arc A380

Class 1

Class 2

Radeon PRO W6600M *

Class 3

UHD Graphics 32EUs
UHD Graphics 750

Class 4

Class 5

* Approximate position of the graphics adapter

> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Benchmarks / Tech > Comparison of Laptop Graphics Cards > Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655 GPU - Benchmarks and Specs
Klaus Hinum (Update: 2018-07-17)