AMD Instinct MI300X vs Intel Arc 130T Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison landscape. The AMD Instinct MI300X has a single benchmark entry, Geekbench OpenCL, where it scored 317,994 points. This places it in the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Intel Arc 130T Mobile, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark entries and an average benchmark score of zero, placing it in the 50th percentile. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, meaning no direct comparative tests have been logged for these two units.

The MI300X's score of 317,994 can be interpreted through its nearest rivals. The NVIDIA H200 NVL scored 334,891, which is 5% higher than the MI300X. The NVIDIA B200 scored 345,482, an 8% advantage. On the other side, the NVIDIA L40S scored 295,763, which the MI300X beats by 7.5%. The NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation scored 287,237, putting the MI300X ahead by 10.7%. These deltas show the MI300X operating in a tightly contested tier of high-end accelerators, neither at the top nor far from it.

For the Arc 130T Mobile, the absence of benchmark data means no numerical comparison can be drawn. The database records no scores, no rivals, and no wins for this part. Its percentile rank of 50 is a statistical midpoint, not a performance indicator, as it stems from an empty benchmark history rather than measured results. The data cannot confirm any performance relationship between the two products beyond the fact that one has a measured score and the other does not.

Where Each One Wins

The wins tally shows zero for both products in direct head-to-head comparisons. This is consistent with the empty head-to-head array. The MI300X, however, holds a clear position in the broader database: its OpenCL score places it among the top accelerators, with its nearest rivals all within a 10.7% range. It wins against the L40S by 7.5% and against the RTX 6000 Ada by 10.7% in that specific test. It loses to the H200 NVL by 5% and to the B200 by 8%. These are the only recorded wins and losses available.

The Arc 130T Mobile has no recorded wins in any benchmark category. Its specification sheet indicates capabilities, but the database has not captured any measured results. The implication is that the Arc 130T Mobile's performance profile remains unquantified in this dataset. Users seeking a performance comparison between the MI300X and the Arc 130T Mobile will find no direct evidence to support one over the other.

Architecture Differences

The two products diverge fundamentally in architecture, purpose, and physical design. The AMD Instinct MI300X uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip built on the CDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. It contains 153,000 million transistors on a die measuring 1017 mm², yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel Arc 130T Mobile uses the Arrow Lake-H chip based on Xe-LPG+ architecture, also fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm node, but its transistor count and die size are recorded as unknown.

The MI300X is a data center accelerator with a 750 W TDP, an OAM Module slot width, and no display outputs. It connects via PCIe 5.0 x16 and requires a suggested power supply of 1150 W. The Arc 130T Mobile is an integrated graphics processor with a 35 W TDP, an IGP slot width, and portable device dependent display outputs. It uses system shared memory for both capacity and bandwidth, meaning its memory performance is system dependent rather than fixed.

Clock behavior differs markedly. The MI300X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz, with memory clocked at 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). The Arc 130T Mobile has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz, with system shared memory. Despite the lower base clock, the Arc's boost clock is slightly higher, suggesting a burst capability that could be relevant in short workloads.

Shader resources are vastly different. The MI300X carries 19,456 shading units, 1,216 texture mapping units, and zero raster operation pipelines. The Arc 130T Mobile has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 28 ROPs. The MI300X also reports zero pixel rate and a texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s, while the Arc reports 61.60 GPixel/s and 123.2 GTexel/s. These numbers reflect their divergent roles: the MI300X is built for compute throughput, the Arc for graphics rendering.

Floating point performance shows the scale gap. The MI300X achieves 81.72 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio). The Arc 130T Mobile achieves 3.942 TFLOPS in FP32 and 7.885 TFLOPS in FP16 (2:1 ratio). The MI300X's FP16 figure matches its FP32, indicating a 1:1 ratio architecture, while the Arc doubles its FP16 rate relative to FP32, indicating a 2:1 ratio. The Arc also has 7 ray tracing cores, a feature the MI300X does not list.

API support diverges completely. The MI300X reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, reflecting its non-graphics accelerator status. The Arc 130T Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, confirming its graphics-oriented design. Memory configuration reinforces this: the MI300X has 192 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, while the Arc relies entirely on system shared memory.

FAQ

Q: What is the Geekbench OpenCL score of the AMD Instinct MI300X?

A: The MI300X scored 317,994 in Geekbench OpenCL, placing it in the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database.

Q: Does the Intel Arc 130T Mobile have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database shows an empty benchmark array for the Arc 130T Mobile, with an average benchmark score of zero and no nearest rivals listed.

Q: How does the MI300X compare to the NVIDIA H200 NVL?

A: The H200 NVL scored 334,891, which is 5% higher than the MI300X's 317,994 in Geekbench OpenCL.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two products?

A: The MI300X has a TDP of 750 W, while the Arc 130T Mobile has a TDP of 35 W.

Q: What memory configuration does the MI300X use?

A: The MI300X uses 192 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the FP32 performance of each product?

A: The MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS in FP32, while the Arc 130T Mobile delivers 3.942 TFLOPS in FP32.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear separation of roles. The AMD Instinct MI300X is a high-throughput accelerator with a measured OpenCL score of 317,994, placing it in the 100th percentile. Its nearest rivals are all within a 10.7% margin, indicating it competes in a dense field of top-tier accelerators. It delivers 81.72 TFLOPS in FP32, has 192 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus, and carries 19,456 shading units. Its architecture lacks display outputs and graphics API support, confirming it is not intended for rendering tasks.

The Intel Arc 130T Mobile is an integrated GPU with no recorded benchmark data. Its specifications indicate a graphics-capable part: 28 ROPs, 7 ray tracing cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and 61.60 GPixel/s pixel rate. Its 35 W TDP and system shared memory point to a low-power, portable device integration. The absence of benchmark scores means the database cannot confirm its performance level, only its design intent.

For users selecting between these two, the data provides a straightforward answer: the MI300X is for compute workloads that demand massive memory bandwidth and FP32 throughput, while the Arc 130T Mobile is for graphics applications in portable devices where power efficiency and API compatibility matter. No recorded benchmark connects them directly, so any performance comparison between the two would be speculative.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Instinct MI300X | Intel Arc 130T Mobile |

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

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | Arrow Lake-H |

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Xe-LPG+ |

| Generation | Instinct (MIx) | Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | unknown |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 2200 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1300 MHz 5.2 Gbps effective | System Shared |

| Memory Size | 192 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 | 19456 | 896 |

| TMUs | 1216 | 56 |

| ROPs | 0 | 28 |

| RT Cores | null | 7 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 61.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 123.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 81.72 TFLOPS | 3.942 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) | 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | 35 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | null |

| Suggested PSU | 1150 W | null |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | IGP |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Production Status | null | Active |

| Release Date | 2023-12-05 | 2025-01-12 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | HD Graphics-M |

| Percentile Vs All GPUs | 100 | 50 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 317994 | 0 |