AMD Instinct MI300A vs Intel Arc Graphics 24EU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Instinct MI300A and the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU. The database lists zero wins for either part in this pairing, and no shared test scores are available for comparison. The absence of overlapping measurements reflects the fundamentally different roles these two processors occupy in the market.

The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU does have one recorded benchmark entry: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733. This places it in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, meaning 97% of recorded parts score higher. Its average benchmark score across all tests is also 733, identical to its single result. The nearest rivals for the Intel part show a tight cluster: the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and Intel Arc Graphics 64EU both score exactly 733, a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon HD 6470M sits 1.4% behind at 723, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M leads by 2.4% with a score of 751.

The AMD Instinct MI300A has no benchmark entries in the database, no average score, and no nearest rivals listed. Its percentile rank of 50 is a neutral placement, indicating the database does not classify it among tested gaming or general-purpose graphics parts. This is consistent with its role as a compute accelerator without display outputs, rather than a conventional graphics card.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU wins in the only measurable performance category present in the database: rasterized 3D rendering. Its 733-point Steel Nomad score, while low in the overall distribution, demonstrates functional graphics capability. It edges past the AMD Radeon HD 6470M by 1.4% and trails the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M by 2.4%, placing it in a performance band roughly equivalent to entry-level discrete GPUs from roughly a decade ago. The 24EU part also delivers a pixel rate of 12.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 24.00 GTexel/s, confirming it can drive display outputs and handle basic graphics workloads.

The AMD Instinct MI300A wins in compute throughput by every measurable specification. Its FP32 output of 61.29 TFLOPS dwarfs the Intel part's 768.0 GFLOPS, a difference of roughly 80 times. The texture rate of 1,915.2 GTexel/s versus 24.00 GTexel/s shows an even larger gap in fill-rate-related compute. The MI300A pairs this with 128 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel part relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth that the database records as system dependent. The MI300A also reports 14,592 shading units and 912 texture mapping units against the Intel part's 192 and 12, respectively.

The MI300A's advantage extends to its memory subsystem and interface. The 8192-bit HBM3 bus and 5.32 TB/s bandwidth are orders of magnitude beyond what an integrated graphics processor can access through shared system memory. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface on the AMD part provides a dedicated high-bandwidth connection, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus interface typical of integrated graphics. Neither part lists tensor cores or ray tracing cores, so no comparison is possible in those areas.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share a foundry but diverge in nearly every architectural choice. Both use TSMC manufacturing: the AMD Instinct MI300A uses a 5 nm process, while the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU uses a 3 nm process. The AMD chip, codenamed Aqua Vanjaram, implements the CDNA 3.0 architecture and belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation. The Intel part uses the Xe-LPG architecture, part of the Arc Graphics (Arrow Lake) generation, and is built into the Arrow Lake-S chip. The die sizes reflect their conflicting priorities: the MI300A measures 1017 mm² with 153,000 million transistors, giving a density of 150.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel chip is 243 mm² with 17,800 million transistors, a density of 73.3 million per square millimeter. The AMD part uses more than eight times the transistor count on a die more than four times larger.

The memory architectures could not be more different. The MI300A integrates 128 GB of HBM3 across an 8192-bit bus, reaching 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth with memory clocks at 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). The Intel part uses system-shared memory with a system-shared bus width and system-dependent bandwidth, which is typical for integrated graphics where the CPU and GPU share the same memory pool. Clock behavior also differs: the MI300A runs at a 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost, while the Intel part runs at 300 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost. The higher base clock on the AMD part reflects a design intended for sustained compute loads, whereas the Intel part's low base clock suits power-saving integrated use.

The fixed-function and output capabilities separate them further. The MI300A reports 0 ROPs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, with no display outputs at all. Its API support is listed as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU includes 6 ROPs, a 12.00 GPixel/s pixel rate, and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its display outputs are motherboard dependent, meaning the integrated GPU connects to monitors through the host board. The MI300A is an OAM module with no power connectors and a 750 W TDP, requiring a suggested power supply of 1150 W. The Intel part is an IGP with a 65 W TDP, no dedicated power connectors, and no suggested PSU listed. The MI300A was released on December 5, 2023, with no production status recorded. The Intel part was released on October 23, 2024, and its production status is listed as active.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300A delivers 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU delivers 768.0 GFLOPS. The AMD part is roughly 80 times faster in this metric.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU support modern graphics APIs?

A: Yes. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD Instinct MI300A, by contrast, lists N/A for all three APIs.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each processor have?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300A has 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth from 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU uses system-shared memory, and its bandwidth is listed as system dependent.

Q: What is the performance ranking of the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU in the database?

A: It sits in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs, with a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M, scores 751, which is 2.4% higher.

Q: Which part has a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU uses a 3 nm TSMC process, while the AMD Instinct MI300A uses a 5 nm TSMC process. Both are fabricated by TSMC.

Q: Can the AMD Instinct MI300A output video to a display?

A: No. The MI300A has no display outputs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU has motherboard-dependent display outputs and a 12.00 GPixel/s pixel rate.

The Verdict

The data describes two processors with no meaningful performance overlap. The AMD Instinct MI300A is a compute accelerator aimed at workloads that require massive memory bandwidth and FP32 throughput. Its 5.32 TB/s of HBM3 bandwidth, 61.29 TFLOPS FP32, and 128 GB capacity place it in a class where graphics output and consumer API support are irrelevant. The absence of display outputs, the N/A API listings, and the 0 MPixel/s pixel rate all confirm this orientation. Its 50th percentile rank in the database is a neutral marker, reflecting that no gaming or conventional graphics benchmarks apply to it.

The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU is an integrated graphics processor designed for display output and basic 3D acceleration. Its 733 Steel Nomad score, while low in absolute terms, places it in a competitive band with the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and 64EU at identical scores, 1.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 6470M, and 2.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M. It supports current graphics APIs, drives displays through the motherboard, and consumes 65 W. The MI300A draws 750 W and requires a 1150 W power supply.

A buyer needing general-purpose compute with enormous memory bandwidth would select the MI300A. A user needing integrated graphics for a desktop system with modern API support would select the Intel part. The database records no scenario where these two compete for the same task.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Instinct MI300A | Intel Arc Graphics 24EU |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Xe-LPG |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 3 nm |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 243 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | 73.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 2000 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 | 192 |

| TMUs | 912 | 12 |

| ROPs | 0 | 6 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 12.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,915.2 GTexel/s | 24.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 61.29 TFLOPS | 768.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 1.536 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | 65 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | Not listed |

| Suggested PSU | 1150 W | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | Ring Bus |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Motherboard Dependent |

| DirectX | N/A | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2023-12-05 | 2024-10-23 |

| Production Status | Not listed | Active |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | HD Graphics |