AMD Instinct MI300 vs Intel Arc 140V Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for the AMD Instinct MI300 and the Intel Arc 140V Mobile. The win counters for each product stand at zero, and the comparative benchmark fields are empty. This absence of measured data means any direct performance comparison must be derived from the architectural specifications and computed throughput figures recorded for each part.

The raw compute numbers show a massive disparity in scale. The AMD Instinct MI300 delivers 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile delivers 3.994 TFLOPS of FP32. That places the MI300 at roughly 12 times the FP32 throughput of the Arc 140V, based strictly on the recorded figures. In FP16 compute, the gap narrows slightly in relative terms but remains enormous: the MI300 records 47.87 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the Arc 140V records 7.987 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. The MI300 still holds a roughly 6x advantage in raw FP16 work per clock.

Texture throughput follows the same pattern. The MI300 posts a texture rate of 1,496.0 GTexel/s, against 124.8 GTexel/s for the Arc 140V. That is a 12x difference, consistent with the FP32 ratio. Pixel rate is a different story entirely. The MI300 records 0 MPixel/s, since it has no raster output units and no display outputs. The Arc 140V posts 62.40 GPixel/s with 32 ROPs. In any rasterization workload that depends on pixel fill, the Arc 140V is the only one of the two that functions at all.

Memory bandwidth is another area where the MI300 dominates. The MI300 uses 128 GB of HBM3 across an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s. The Arc 140V uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent. The MI300's dedicated memory subsystem provides a fixed, massive bandwidth figure, while the Arc 140V's performance will scale with the host platform's memory configuration. The MI300 also records a memory clock of 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective transfer rate.

Clock behavior differs sharply. The MI300 runs a 1000 MHz base and 1700 MHz boost. The Arc 140V runs a 300 MHz base and 1950 MHz boost. The Intel part has a higher peak clock by 250 MHz, but the AMD part carries 13.75 times the shading units (14080 vs 1024), which explains how the MI300 achieves its throughput lead despite the lower boost clock.

Both products sit at the 50th percentile in the database's percentile versus all GPUs ranking. Both have an average benchmark score of zero, and neither has any nearest rivals listed. The database treats them as occupying the same percentile tier, but that ranking is based on an empty benchmark set, so it carries no comparative weight.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300 wins in every category that involves raw compute throughput, memory capacity, and memory bandwidth. Its 47.87 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 figures place it in a class of accelerator designed for heavy numerical workloads. The 128 GB HBM3 memory pool with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth gives it a decisive advantage in datasets that exceed the memory capacity of typical graphics processors. The 1,496.0 GTexel/s texture rate indicates strong performance in texture-bound compute tasks. The MI300 also carries a 153,000 million transistor count on a 1017 mm² die, pointing to a design built for maximum parallel throughput rather than efficiency or portability.

The Intel Arc 140V Mobile wins in every category involving rasterization, display output, and power efficiency. Its 62.40 GPixel/s pixel rate and 32 ROPs mean it can actually drive a display and perform traditional graphics rendering, while the MI300 records no pixel output capability at all. The Arc 140V supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it suitable for modern graphics APIs. The MI300 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, confirming it is not a graphics rendering part. The Arc 140V also draws 37 W, compared to the MI300's 600 W, and requires no external power connectors, while the MI300 needs 2x 8-pin connectors and a 1000 W suggested PSU.

The Arc 140V is an integrated graphics processor on the Lunar Lake chip, with a 172 mm² die size and a 3 nm TSMC process node. The MI300 is a discrete accelerator on a 1017 mm² die using a 5 nm TSMC process. The Arc 140V's production status is listed as active, while the MI300's production status is not recorded. For any workload that fits within an integrated graphics context, such as a laptop display pipeline or light rendering, the Arc 140V is the functional choice. For any workload that requires massive parallel compute and large memory pools, the MI300 is the only one of the two that can operate.

Architecture Differences

The two products come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Instinct MI300 uses CDNA 3.0 architecture, built on the Aqua Vanjaram chip. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile uses Xe2-LPG architecture, built on the Lunar Lake chip. Both are manufactured by TSMC, but on different nodes: the MI300 uses a 5 nm process, while the Arc 140V uses a 3 nm process. The MI300 carries 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million transistors per mm². The Arc 140V's transistor count is listed as unknown, but its die size is 172 mm², which is roughly one-sixth the area of the MI300.

The compute unit counts differ by an order of magnitude. The MI300 has 14,080 shading units, 880 texture mapping units, and 0 ROPs. The Arc 140V has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The MI300 has no ray tracing cores recorded, while the Arc 140V has 8 ray tracing cores. Neither product lists tensor core counts.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The MI300 uses 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth and a 1300 MHz memory clock. The Arc 140V uses system shared memory with a system shared bus width and system dependent bandwidth. The MI300's memory clock is fixed at 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective transfer, while the Arc 140V's memory speed depends entirely on the host system.

The feature sets reflect their intended roles. The MI300 has no display outputs and lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support. The Arc 140V has display outputs described as portable device dependent, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and operates as an IGP with no external power connectors. The MI300 uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface and requires 2x 8-pin power connectors with a 1000 W suggested PSU. The Arc 140V uses an IGP bus interface and has no power connector requirement.

The MI300 measures 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, dimensions typical of a discrete accelerator card. The Arc 140V has no length or height recorded, consistent with an integrated processor that mounts directly on a motherboard. The MI300's release date is recorded as January 3, 2023, and its predecessor is listed as Radeon Instinct. The Arc 140V's release date is September 23, 2024, and its predecessor is listed as HD Graphics-M. The MI300's generation is Instinct (MIx), while the Arc 140V's generation is Arc Graphics-M (Lunar Lake).

FAQ

Q: Which product has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 records 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, compared to 3.994 TFLOPS for the Intel Arc 140V Mobile. The MI300's FP32 figure is approximately 12 times higher.

Q: Can the AMD Instinct MI300 output video to a display?

A: No. The MI300 lists no display outputs and records a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s with 0 ROPs. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile, by contrast, has display outputs described as portable device dependent and a pixel rate of 62.40 GPixel/s.

Q: What memory configurations do the two products use?

A: The MI300 uses 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The Arc 140V uses system shared memory, with system shared bus width and system dependent bandwidth.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The MI300 has a TDP of 600 W, requires 2x 8-pin power connectors, and lists a 1000 W suggested PSU. The Arc 140V has a TDP of 37 W, requires no external power connectors, and lists no suggested PSU.

Q: Which product supports modern graphics APIs?

A: The Intel Arc 140V Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD Instinct MI300 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Q: What are the manufacturing nodes for each product?

A: The MI300 uses a 5 nm TSMC process with a 1017 mm² die. The Arc 140V uses a 3 nm TSMC process with a 172 mm² die. Both are fabricated by TSMC.

The Verdict

The data describes two products with almost no functional overlap. The AMD Instinct MI300 is a 600 W discrete accelerator with 128 GB of HBM3, 5.32 TB/s of memory bandwidth, and 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. It has no display outputs, no graphics API support, and no rasterization capability. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile is a 37 W integrated graphics processor with 3.994 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 62.40 GPixel/s pixel throughput, 8 ray tracing cores, and full support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

For workloads involving massive parallel computation, large memory-resident datasets, or high-bandwidth data movement, the MI300 is the only viable choice. Its 5.32 TB/s memory bandwidth and 128 GB capacity exceed anything the Arc 140V can access, since the Arc 140V depends on system shared memory. The MI300's 1,496.0 GTexel/s texture rate and 880 TMUs indicate a design optimized for throughput at scale.

For workloads involving rendering, display output, or power-constrained mobile use, the Arc 140V is the only functional option. The MI300 cannot produce a pixel, cannot connect to a display, and consumes 600 W. The Arc 140V draws 37 W, integrates into the Lunar Lake chip, and supports the full modern graphics API stack.

The percentile ranking places both at the 50th percentile versus all GPUs, but that ranking is based on empty benchmark fields and zero average scores. The recorded specifications show a clear split: the MI300 for compute density, the Arc 140V for graphics functionality. There is no scenario in the recorded data where one replaces the other. The choice depends entirely on whether the task requires parallel compute or rasterized graphics output.