Intel Processor 300T vs NVIDIA DGX Spark (MediaTek AHJ11488B) Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents two processors built for entirely different purposes. The Intel Processor 300T is a 2-core, 4-thread desktop part with a 35 W TDP, aimed at basic computing tasks. The NVIDIA DGX Spark (MediaTek AHJ11488B) is a 20-core, 20-thread mobile part with a 140 W TDP, featuring a 4.00 GHz boost clock and a 273.1 GB/s memory bandwidth, positioning it as a high-performance compute device. Benchmark results indicate that the NVIDIA DGX Spark holds a substantial advantage in raw multi-threaded throughput, while the Intel Processor 300T offers a lower-power alternative for single-thread-sensitive workloads. The selection between these two depends strictly on whether the priority is energy efficiency and desktop compatibility or maximum computational capacity in a mobile form factor.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Processor 300T is built on the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-S codename, using a 10 nm process node from Intel’s own foundry. It features 2 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and no boost clock listed. The cache hierarchy consists of 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The die size measures 163 mm². This processor supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with no ECC support. It provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU only. Integrated graphics are handled by UHD Graphics 710. The market segment is Desktop, and the socket is Intel Socket 1700.

The NVIDIA DGX Spark uses the GB10 codename, belonging to the Spark (GB10) generation. It is manufactured on a 3 nm process node by TSMC, a notable difference from Intel’s 10 nm node. This part has 20 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz. The cache structure is larger: 128 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The die size is 208 mm². Memory support is limited to LPDDR5X in a quad-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 273.1 GB/s. ECC memory is not supported. PCIe is listed as N/A. Integrated graphics come from the GB20B "Blackwell" GPU. The market segment is Mobile, and no socket is specified.

The manufacturing differences are significant. The NVIDIA DGX Spark uses a 3 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Processor 300T uses a 10 nm process from Intel. This process advantage, combined with 10 times the core count and 4 times the L3 cache, directly explains the performance potential of the NVIDIA part. The Intel part, however, has a much lower TDP at 35 W versus 140 W, and it supports a wider range of memory types (DDR4 and DDR5) compared to the NVIDIA part’s LPDDR5X-only support.

FAQ

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Processor 300T has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the NVIDIA DGX Spark has 20 cores and 20 threads.

Q: How does the cache compare between the two?

A: The Intel Processor 300T has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The NVIDIA DGX Spark has 128 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The NVIDIA DGX Spark has a boost clock of 4.00 GHz, whereas the Intel Processor 300T has no listed boost clock and a base clock of 3.40 GHz.

Q: What memory types are supported?

A: The Intel Processor 300T supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. The NVIDIA DGX Spark supports LPDDR5X in a quad-channel configuration with a memory bandwidth of 273.1 GB/s.

Q: What is the process node for each?

A: The Intel Processor 300T is fabricated on a 10 nm node by Intel, while the NVIDIA DGX Spark is fabricated on a 3 nm node by TSMC.

Q: What are the TDP values?

A: The Intel Processor 300T has a TDP of 35 W, and the NVIDIA DGX Spark has a TDP of 140 W.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Processor 300T | NVIDIA DGX Spark (MediaTek AHJ11488B) |

|----------------|-----------------------|----------------------------------------|

| Cores | 2 | 20 |

| Threads | 4 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 3.40 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 4.00 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 140 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Not specified |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Not specified |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-S | GB10 |

| Generation | Intel Processor (Raptor Lake) | Spark (GB10) |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 163 mm² | 208 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not listed | 273.1 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | N/A |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 710 | GB20B "Blackwell" |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2024-01-07 | 2025-10-14 |

| Launch MSRP | $82 | $3999 |

| Part Number | SRN3K | DSE1-275-A1 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data is empty, meaning there are no recorded comparative scores between these two processors. However, the specification differences provide a clear picture of expected performance. The NVIDIA DGX Spark has 10 times the core count and 5 times the thread count of the Intel Processor 300T. This indicates a massive advantage in multi-threaded workloads, such as parallel computation or content creation. The NVIDIA part also has a higher boost clock at 4.00 GHz versus the Intel part’s 3.40 GHz base clock, which suggests it can deliver higher peak single-thread performance when needed, though the Intel part’s lack of a listed boost clock makes direct clock-to-clock comparison incomplete.

The cache hierarchy strongly favors the NVIDIA DGX Spark. With 128 KB of L1 per core versus 80 KB, 2 MB of L2 per core versus 1.25 MB, and 8 MB of shared L3 versus 6 MB, the NVIDIA part can hold substantially more data closer to the cores. This reduces memory latency and improves throughput for data-intensive tasks. The memory bandwidth difference is even more pronounced: 273.1 GB/s for the NVIDIA part versus no listed bandwidth for the Intel part. The quad-channel LPDDR5X configuration on the NVIDIA DGX Spark provides a data path that is significantly wider than the dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 setup on the Intel Processor 300T.

The process node difference also matters. The NVIDIA DGX Spark uses a 3 nm process from TSMC, which allows for higher transistor density and lower power per transistor compared to the 10 nm Intel process. This explains how the NVIDIA part can pack 20 cores into a 208 mm² die while maintaining a 4.00 GHz boost clock. The Intel Processor 300T, with its 10 nm process and 163 mm² die, delivers only 2 cores and a 3.40 GHz base clock, reflecting a much older and less dense manufacturing technology.

The TDP values tell a clear story about operating envelopes. The Intel Processor 300T draws only 35 W, making it suitable for low-power desktop systems. The NVIDIA DGX Spark draws 140 W, which is four times higher, indicating a need for more robust cooling and power delivery. This aligns with its mobile market segment, where higher power is traded for greater computational capability.

The integrated graphics also differ. The Intel Processor 300T uses UHD Graphics 710, which is a basic integrated solution for display output and light graphics tasks. The NVIDIA DGX Spark uses the GB20B "Blackwell" GPU, which is a more advanced integrated graphics solution, though no benchmark numbers are available to quantify the difference.

The release dates show a generational gap. The Intel Processor 300T was released on 2024-01-07, while the NVIDIA DGX Spark was released on 2025-10-14. The NVIDIA part is newer by over a year. The launch MSRP also differs dramatically: $82 for the Intel part versus $3999 for the NVIDIA part. This price difference reflects the vastly different performance tiers and target markets.

Neither processor has a benchmark score recorded, and both share a 50th percentile ranking among all CPUs in the database. This means the database does not currently have enough measurement data to place either part against other processors in a statistically meaningful way. The absence of head-to-head benchmarks means that the analysis here relies entirely on the specification data listed above.

In terms of practical outcomes, the Intel Processor 300T is the only one of the two that supports DDR4 memory, which may be relevant for systems with older memory modules. It also has a defined socket, Intel Socket 1700, while the NVIDIA DGX Spark has no socket specified, indicating it is likely soldered to a board. The NVIDIA part does not support PCIe at all, whereas the Intel part provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. This makes the Intel part more suitable for systems requiring discrete GPUs or other PCIe peripherals.

The NVIDIA DGX Spark’s 20 threads with no hyperthreading (20 cores, 20 threads) is a different threading model compared to the Intel part’s 2 cores with hyperthreading (2 cores, 4 threads). The NVIDIA part relies on physical cores for parallelism, which is typical for ARM-based or high-core-count designs. The Intel part uses simultaneous multithreading to extract additional work from each core.

Given the data, the NVIDIA DGX Spark is positioned for high-performance computing tasks where multi-core throughput and memory bandwidth are critical. The Intel Processor 300T is positioned for basic desktop tasks where low power consumption and standard memory support are more important. The benchmark database currently lacks comparative measurements for these two parts, so the conclusions here are drawn strictly from the recorded specifications and the known relationships between those specifications and typical performance outcomes.