AMD Instinct MI300A vs Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Instinct MI300A and Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, and the recorded data confirms they serve entirely different purposes. The MI300A is an OAM module designed for high-performance compute workloads, drawing 750 W with 128 GB of HBM3 memory and delivering 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The Arc 48EU Mobile is a 28 W integrated graphics processor for laptops, using system shared memory and delivering 1,382.4 GFLOPS of FP32 performance. The database places both parts at the 50th percentile, but this similarity is misleading; the MI300A has no benchmark scores recorded, and the Arc 48EU Mobile also has no benchmark scores recorded. Neither part has nearest rivals in the database, so direct comparative scoring is unavailable. The data indicates that the MI300A is for compute centers needing massive memory bandwidth and throughput, while the Arc 48EU Mobile targets portable devices requiring basic graphics output with minimal power draw.

Architecture Differences

The MI300A uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on a 5 nm process from TSMC, with the Aqua Vanjaram chip. The Arc 48EU Mobile uses the Xe-LPG architecture on a 10 nm process from Intel, with the Meteor Lake chip. The MI300A is built at 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, producing a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The Arc 48EU Mobile has no transistor count, die size, or density recorded in the database. The MI300A belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation and succeeds the Radeon Instinct line. The Arc 48EU Mobile belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) generation and succeeds the HD Graphics-M line. The MI300A has no display outputs, while the Arc 48EU Mobile has display outputs described as portable device dependent. The MI300A supports no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan APIs, whereas the Arc 48EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300A uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the Arc 48EU Mobile uses a Ring Bus interface.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two parts, and neither has recorded benchmark scores or average benchmark scores above zero. The wins count for each is zero. However, the specification data provides a basis for comparing their computational capabilities. The MI300A delivers 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Arc 48EU Mobile delivers 1,382.4 GFLOPS. Converting to a common unit, the MI300A is roughly 44 times higher in FP32 throughput, a gap that reflects the different target segments. The texture rate for the MI300A is 1,915.2 GTexel/s, compared to 43.20 GTexel/s for the Arc 48EU Mobile, a difference of about 44 times as well. The pixel rate tells a different story: the MI300A reports 0 MPixel/s, indicating it is not designed for rasterized pixel output, while the Arc 48EU Mobile reports 14.40 GPixel/s. The MI300A has no ROPS, while the Arc 48EU Mobile has 8 ROPS. The MI300A has 14,592 shading units and 912 TMUs, while the Arc 48EU Mobile has 384 shading units and 24 TMUs. The MI300A memory subsystem uses 128 GB of HBM3 across an 8192 bit bus, yielding 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The Arc 48EU Mobile uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth figure. The MI300A memory clock is 1300 MHz, which translates to 5.2 Gbps effective, while the Arc 48EU Mobile memory clock is listed as system shared. The MI300A base clock is 1000 MHz with a boost clock of 2100 MHz. The Arc 48EU Mobile base clock is 300 MHz with a boost clock of 1800 MHz. The MI300A power draw is 750 W, with a suggested PSU of 1150 W, while the Arc 48EU Mobile draws 28 W and has no suggested PSU listed. The MI300A uses no power connectors, while the Arc 48EU Mobile has no power connector data recorded.

The largest advantage for the MI300A appears in memory bandwidth and raw compute throughput. The 5.32 TB/s figure dwarfs any system shared memory configuration, and the 128 GB capacity supports large data sets that an integrated GPU cannot address. The Arc 48EU Mobile, by contrast, offers the only pixel rendering capability between the two, with 14.40 GPixel/s and 8 ROPS, along with a full API stack for DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300A lists no APIs at all, reinforcing its role as a compute accelerator rather than a graphics output device. The Arc 48EU Mobile also supports FP16 at 2.765 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the MI300A has no FP16 figure recorded. The MI300A has no tensor cores or RT cores listed, and the Arc 48EU Mobile likewise has no tensor cores or RT cores listed.

The clock behavior differs substantially. The MI300A operates at a 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost, a 1100 MHz boost headroom. The Arc 48EU Mobile operates at a 300 MHz base and 1800 MHz boost, a 1500 MHz boost headroom. The higher boost range on the Intel part suggests more aggressive frequency scaling under load, although the absolute clock speeds remain lower than the AMD part. The MI300A has a memory clock of 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective data rate, while the Arc 48EU Mobile memory clock is system shared, meaning it depends entirely on the host platform.

The production status for the MI300A is not recorded, while the Arc 48EU Mobile is listed as active. Release dates differ by eight days: the MI300A released on 2023-12-05, and the Arc 48EU Mobile released on 2023-12-13. Neither part has a launch MSRP in the database. The MI300A has no successor listed, and the Arc 48EU Mobile also has no successor listed.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in every major specification category recorded in the database. The process node differs: 5 nm for the MI300A versus 10 nm for the Arc 48EU Mobile. The foundry differs: TSMC for the MI300A versus Intel for the Arc 48EU Mobile. The chip differs: Aqua Vanjaram versus Meteor Lake. The architecture differs: CDNA 3.0 versus Xe-LPG. The generation differs: Instinct (MIx) versus Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake). The transistor count differs: 153,000 million for the MI300A, with no figure for the Arc 48EU Mobile. The die size differs: 1017 mm² for the MI300A, with no figure for the Arc 48EU Mobile. The transistor density differs: 150.4M per mm² for the MI300A, with no figure for the Arc 48EU Mobile.

The shading units differ: 14,592 versus 384. The TMUs differ: 912 versus 24. The ROPS differ: 0 versus 8. The pixel rate differs: 0 MPixel/s versus 14.40 GPixel/s. The texture rate differs: 1,915.2 GTexel/s versus 43.20 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance differs: 61.29 TFLOPS versus 1,382.4 GFLOPS. The FP16 performance differs: no record for the MI300A versus 2.765 TFLOPS for the Arc 48EU Mobile. The TDP differs: 750 W versus 28 W. The slot width differs: OAM Module versus IGP. The power connectors differ: none for the MI300A versus no data for the Arc 48EU Mobile. The suggested PSU differs: 1150 W for the MI300A versus no data for the Arc 48EU Mobile. The bus interface differs: PCIe 5.0 x16 versus Ring Bus. The display outputs differ: no outputs versus portable device dependent. The DirectX support differs: N/A versus 12 (12_1). The OpenGL support differs: N/A versus 4.6. The Vulkan support differs: N/A versus 1.4. The memory size differs: 128 GB versus system shared. The memory type differs: HBM3 versus system shared. The memory bus width differs: 8192 bit versus system shared. The memory bandwidth differs: 5.32 TB/s versus system dependent. The memory clock differs: 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective versus system shared. The base clock differs: 1000 MHz versus 300 MHz. The boost clock differs: 2100 MHz versus 1800 MHz. The production status differs: no record for the MI300A versus active for the Arc 48EU Mobile. The release date differs: 2023-12-05 versus 2023-12-13. The predecessor differs: Radeon Instinct versus HD Graphics-M.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300A delivers 61.29 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile delivers 1,382.4 GFLOPS. The MI300A is approximately 44 times higher in FP32 throughput.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The MI300A has 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth from 128 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192 bit bus. The Arc 48EU Mobile uses system shared memory with bandwidth listed as system dependent, so no fixed figure is available.

Q: Which GPU supports graphics APIs?

A: The Arc 48EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300A lists no API support, with DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all marked N/A.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The MI300A has a TDP of 750 W with a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The Arc 48EU Mobile has a TDP of 28 W and no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Which GPU has pixel rendering capability?

A: The Arc 48EU Mobile has a pixel rate of 14.40 GPixel/s with 8 ROPS. The MI300A has a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s and 0 ROPS, indicating no pixel rendering pipeline.

Q: What are the release dates for these two parts?

A: The MI300A released on 2023-12-05, and the Arc 48EU Mobile released on 2023-12-13. Both parts have no launch MSRP recorded in the database.