AMD Instinct MI300A vs Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for the AMD Instinct MI300A and the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile. Neither product has an average benchmark score reported, and both are placed at the 50th percentile versus all GPUs in the database. There are no nearest rivals listed for either part, so no delta percentages or comparative performance deltas can be derived from the database.

What can be stated from the raw specifications is the scale of difference in theoretical throughput. The AMD Instinct MI300A delivers 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile delivers 3.942 TFLOPS. That places the MI300A at approximately 15.5 times the FP32 throughput of the Arc part, based solely on the recorded figures. In texture processing, the MI300A reaches 1,915.2 GTexel/s against 123.2 GTexel/s for the Intel mobile GPU. The pixel rate comparison is inverted in nature: the Intel part has a recorded pixel rate of 52.80 GPixel/s, while the MI300A reports 0 MPixel/s because it has no ROPs and no display outputs.

Memory bandwidth differences are similarly stark. The MI300A uses 128 GB of HBM3 across an 8192-bit bus for 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, so no fixed bandwidth number is recorded. Clock behavior also differs: the MI300A has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost of 2100 MHz, while the Intel part has a 300 MHz base and a 2200 MHz boost. Despite the higher boost on the Intel chip, the vastly different execution resource counts (14592 shading units versus 896) explain the compute gap.

Because no benchmark wins are recorded for either product, the head-to-head comparison must rely on these architectural and theoretical figures rather than measured application performance.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI300A uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, built at TSMC on a 5 nm process. It contains 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses the Xe-LPG architecture on the Meteor Lake chip, built at Intel on a 10 nm process. No transistor count, die size, or density figures are recorded for the Intel part.

The MI300A belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation and lists Radeon Instinct as its predecessor. The Intel part belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) generation and lists HD Graphics-M as its predecessor. Both products were released within days of each other: the MI300A on December 5, 2023, and the Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile on December 13, 2023.

Memory architecture separates these two products fundamentally. The MI300A has dedicated HBM3 memory: 128 GB, 8192-bit bus, 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, with memory clocked at 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). The Intel part has no dedicated memory; it uses system shared memory, system shared bus width, and system dependent bandwidth. This means the Intel GPU depends entirely on the host platform's memory subsystem, while the AMD accelerator carries its own high-bandwidth pool.

The MI300A has 14592 shading units, 912 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The MI300A has no pixel rate (0 MPixel/s) and no display outputs. The Intel part has a pixel rate of 52.80 GPixel/s and its display outputs are portable device dependent. API support also diverges: the MI300A lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, while the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Power and physical form differ sharply. The MI300A is an OAM module with a TDP of 750 W and a suggested PSU of 1150 W, using no power connectors (likely due to the OAM form factor). The Intel part is an IGP with a TDP of 65 W, no suggested PSU recorded, and uses a Ring Bus interface. The MI300A uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The Intel part is integrated and has no standalone interface beyond the Ring Bus.

FP16 is not recorded for the MI300A, while the Intel part reports 7.885 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. This indicates the Intel architecture supports packed FP16 execution, but no comparable figure exists in the database for the AMD part.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300A records 61.29 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile records 3.942 TFLOPS FP32. The MI300A is about 15.5 times higher on this metric.

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX?

A: No. The MI300A lists DirectX as N/A, along with OpenGL and Vulkan as N/A. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What memory does each GPU use?

A: The MI300A uses 128 GB of HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: How do the process nodes compare?

A: The MI300A is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile is built on a 10 nm process at Intel.

Q: Which GPU has display outputs?

A: The MI300A has no outputs. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has outputs that are portable device dependent, meaning they depend on the host portable device.

Q: What are the TDP values?

A: The MI300A has a TDP of 750 W and a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has a TDP of 65 W with no suggested PSU recorded.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI300A | Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Xe-LPG |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | Not recorded |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | Not recorded |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 2200 MHz |

| Memory Size | 128 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | HBM3 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 5.32 TB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 14592 | 896 |

| TMUs | 912 | 56 |

| ROPs | 0 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 52.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,915.2 GTexel/s | 123.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 61.29 TFLOPS | 3.942 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not recorded | 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | 65 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | Ring Bus |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | N/A | 12 (12_1) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Production Status | Not recorded | Active |

| Release Date | 2023-12-05 | 2023-12-13 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | HD Graphics-M |

The Verdict

The data describes two products with almost no functional overlap. The AMD Instinct MI300A is a compute accelerator: no display outputs, no graphics API support, 750 W TDP, OAM module form factor, and dedicated HBM3 memory. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile is an integrated mobile GPU: 65 W TDP, IGP slot width, system shared memory, full graphics API support, and portable device dependent outputs.

For raw compute workloads that do not require graphics output, the MI300A dominates in every recorded compute specification: FP32 is 61.29 TFLOPS versus 3.942 TFLOPS, texture rate is 1,915.2 GTexel/s versus 123.2 GTexel/s, and memory bandwidth is 5.32 TB/s versus system dependent. The MI300A also has 14592 shading units against 896, and 912 TMUs against 56.

For graphics output and API compatibility, only the Intel part qualifies. The MI300A has no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support and no display outputs. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, with a 52.80 GPixel/s pixel rate enabled by its 24 ROPs.

The MI300A cannot serve as a graphics card. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile cannot approach the compute throughput or memory capacity of the MI300A. The choice between them is dictated entirely by workload type, not by performance overlap.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Instinct MI300A wins on:

• FP32 compute: 61.29 TFLOPS versus 3.942 TFLOPS
• Texture throughput: 1,915.2 GTexel/s versus 123.2 GTexel/s
• Shading units: 14592 versus 896
• TMUs: 912 versus 56
• Memory capacity: 128 GB dedicated HBM3 versus system shared
• Memory bandwidth: 5.32 TB/s versus system dependent
• Memory bus width: 8192 bit versus system shared
• Transistor count: 153,000 million versus not recorded
• Die size: 1017 mm² versus not recorded
• Process node: 5 nm versus 10 nm

Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile wins on:

• Pixel rate: 52.80 GPixel/s versus 0 MPixel/s
• ROPs: 24 versus 0
• Boost clock: 2200 MHz versus 2100 MHz
• Graphics API support: DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4 versus N/A for all
• Display outputs: portable device dependent versus none
• Power efficiency profile: 65 W TDP versus 750 W TDP
• FP16 support: 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) versus not recorded
• Production status: Active versus not recorded
• Form factor: IGP versus OAM Module