AMD Instinct MI300X vs Intel Arc 140T Mobile Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300X and Intel Arc 140T Mobile occupy entirely separate performance classes, and the recorded data confirms this without ambiguity. The MI300X delivers a Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994, placing it at the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Arc 140T Mobile has no recorded benchmark scores, an average score of zero, and sits at the 50th percentile. The MI300X wins every measurable category where data exists, including raw compute, memory bandwidth, and shading throughput, while the Arc 140T Mobile only claims advantages in areas tied to its integrated, mobile-oriented design such as power draw and API compatibility.

The MI300X is built for accelerator-class workloads. Its 19,456 shading units, 1,216 texture mapping units, and 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute place it firmly in the datacenter compute segment. The Arc 140T Mobile, with 1,024 shading units and 4.813 TFLOPS FP32, is positioned for integrated graphics in portable systems. The data shows no overlap in their intended roles: one is a discrete OAM module with no display outputs, the other is an IGP with portable-device-dependent display support. The MI300X leads in every performance metric, while the Arc 140T Mobile leads only in power efficiency and feature support for consumer graphics APIs.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs diverge in nearly every architectural dimension. The MI300X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture with the Aqua Vanjaram chip, built on a 5 nm TSMC process. It integrates 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per square millimeter. The Arc 140T Mobile uses the Xe-LPG+ architecture with the Arrow Lake-H chip, also on a 5 nm TSMC process, but its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database. Both use the same process node and foundry, but the scale difference is extreme: the MI300X die is a massive compute accelerator, while the Arc 140T Mobile is a compact integrated solution.

Memory architecture separates the two even further. The MI300X carries 192 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The Arc 140T Mobile uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, meaning its memory performance is tied to the host platform rather than dedicated VRAM. Clock behavior also differs: the MI300X runs at a 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost, while the Arc 140T Mobile runs at 300 MHz base and 2350 MHz boost. The higher boost clock on the Intel part does not compensate for its far smaller execution engine.

Feature support shows a clear split. The Arc 140T Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, along with 8 ray tracing cores and 32 ROPs. The MI300X reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, has 0 ROPs, and lists no ray tracing cores. The MI300X is a compute-focused accelerator with no consumer graphics output, while the Arc 140T Mobile is a full-featured integrated GPU for portable devices. The pixel rate of the Arc 140T Mobile is 75.20 GPixel/s, while the MI300X reports 0 MPixel/s, reflecting its lack of a rasterization pipeline.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded benchmark for the MI300X is Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 317,994. The Arc 140T Mobile has no recorded benchmarks in the database, so direct comparisons rely on the MI300X's rival set and the architectural figures. The MI300X sits 5% behind the NVIDIA H200 NVL (334,891), 8% behind the NVIDIA B200 (345,482), 7.5% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S (295,763), and 10.7% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation (287,237). These deltas place the MI300X among the top-tier accelerators in the database, within striking distance of the fastest NVIDIA datacenter parts.

The compute gap between the two reviewed GPUs is enormous. The MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32, which is approximately 17 times the Arc 140T Mobile's 4.813 TFLOPS. In FP16, the MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the Arc 140T Mobile delivers 9.626 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. Texture rate tells a similar story: 2,553.6 GTexel/s for the MI300X versus 150.4 GTexel/s for the Arc 140T Mobile. The MI300X also leads in memory capacity and bandwidth by orders of magnitude, with 192 GB and 5.32 TB/s versus shared system memory of variable bandwidth.

The power envelope reverses the performance relationship. The MI300X has a 750 W TDP and requires a suggested 1150 W power supply, while the Arc 140T Mobile has a 35 W TDP and no suggested PSU because it is an IGP. The MI300X is an OAM module with no power connectors listed, while the Arc 140T Mobile is an integrated part with no separate power connector requirement. The data indicates the MI300X trades massive power consumption for massive throughput, whereas the Arc 140T Mobile achieves its modest performance within a mobile-friendly power budget.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X records a Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994. The Intel Arc 140T Mobile has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, with an average benchmark score of 0.

Q: How does the MI300X compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The MI300X is 5% behind the NVIDIA H200 NVL (334,891), 8% behind the NVIDIA B200 (345,482), 7.5% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S (295,763), and 10.7% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation (287,237).

Q: What memory configurations do the two GPUs use?

A: The MI300X uses 192 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The Arc 140T Mobile uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports consumer graphics APIs?

A: The Arc 140T Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300X reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The MI300X has a 750 W TDP with a suggested 1150 W power supply. The Arc 140T Mobile has a 35 W TDP and no suggested PSU, as it is an integrated part.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are built on a 5 nm TSMC process. The MI300X integrates 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, while the Arc 140T Mobile's transistor count and die size are unknown.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in every specification field recorded in the database. The MI300X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture with the Aqua Vanjaram chip, while the Arc 140T Mobile uses Xe-LPG+ with the Arrow Lake-H chip. Both use 5 nm TSMC, but the MI300X has 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, while the Arc 140T Mobile has unknown transistor count and die size. The MI300X has a 1000 MHz base clock and 2100 MHz boost, while the Arc 140T Mobile has a 300 MHz base clock and 2350 MHz boost.

Shading resources differ by a factor of 19: the MI300X has 19,456 shading units and 1,216 TMUs, while the Arc 140T Mobile has 1,024 shading units and 64 TMUs. The MI300X has 0 ROPs and no ray tracing cores, while the Arc 140T Mobile has 32 ROPs and 8 ray tracing cores. The MI300X produces 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 and 81.72 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1), while the Arc 140T Mobile produces 4.813 TFLOPS FP32 and 9.626 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for the MI300X and 75.20 GPixel/s for the Arc 140T Mobile, while texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 150.4 GTexel/s.

Memory differs completely: the MI300X has 192 GB HBM3 on a 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, while the Arc 140T Mobile has system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The MI300X has a 750 W TDP, is an OAM Module with no power connectors, and requires a suggested 1150 W power supply. The Arc 140T Mobile has a 35 W TDP, is an IGP, and has no suggested PSU. The MI300X uses PCIe 5.0 x16 and has no display outputs, while the Arc 140T Mobile uses an IGP bus interface with portable-device-dependent display outputs. API support also differs: the MI300X reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, while the Arc 140T Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Verdict

The data directs each product to a completely different buyer. The AMD Instinct MI300X is a datacenter accelerator with a Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994, placing it at the 100th percentile of all GPUs. Its 192 GB of HBM3 memory, 5.32 TB/s bandwidth, and 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 compute make it suitable for large-scale compute workloads. The Intel Arc 140T Mobile, with no recorded benchmarks and a 50th percentile standing, is an integrated graphics solution for portable devices, delivering 4.813 TFLOPS FP32 within a 35 W power envelope.

The MI300X is the choice for compute-heavy environments where the 750 W TDP and 1150 W suggested power supply are acceptable. It leads the Arc 140T Mobile by roughly 17 times in FP32 throughput and offers dedicated HBM3 memory instead of system-shared memory. The Arc 140T Mobile is the choice for systems needing consumer graphics API support, ray tracing, and low power draw, all within an integrated form factor. The database shows no scenario where the two compete directly; the MI300X targets accelerator racks, and the Arc 140T Mobile targets mobile devices. The recorded data supports selecting the MI300X for raw compute performance and the Arc 140T Mobile for integrated, portable graphics with modern API coverage.