AMD Instinct MI300X vs Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile Comparison

The AMD Instinct MI300X and Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile occupy opposite ends of the hardware spectrum, one a massive data center accelerator and the other an integrated graphics processor for laptops. The recorded data shows a single benchmark result for the MI300X, the Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994, placing it at the 100th percentile among all GPUs. The Intel Arc 112EU Mobile has no recorded benchmark scores, which limits direct comparison, but the available specifications and relative performance data provide a clear picture of their capabilities.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data is empty, with no recorded tests where both devices ran the same workload. The only performance figure in the database is the AMD Instinct MI300X’s Geekbench OpenCL score of 317,994. This result places the MI300X at the absolute top of the database, the 100th percentile of all GPUs. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has no benchmark entries, so its average benchmark score is zero and its percentile ranking sits at 50, a default position for devices without recorded results.

The MI300X’s nearest rivals in the database provide context for its OpenCL score. The NVIDIA B200 leads with an average score of 345,482, which is 8% higher than the MI300X. The NVIDIA H200 NVL follows with 334,891, also ahead by 5%. The MI300X beats the NVIDIA L40S, which scores 295,763, by 7.5%, and it outperforms the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation, which scores 287,237, by 10.7%. These deltas indicate that the MI300X sits in the upper tier of compute accelerators, competitive with the latest NVIDIA data center parts, though not the absolute fastest in the database.

For the Intel Arc 112EU Mobile, no direct rival data exists. The database lists no nearest rivals, no average score, and no benchmark wins. This makes a numeric head-to-head comparison impossible. The analysis instead relies on the architectural and specification differences, which show two devices designed for entirely different roles.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300X wins in compute-intensive workloads that demand massive parallel throughput. Its FP32 performance is 81.72 TFLOPS, and its FP16 performance matches at 81.72 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not trade off precision for speed. The texture rate reaches 2,553.6 GTexel/s, and the device has 19,456 shading units. These figures indicate a processor built for heavy mathematical workloads such as AI training, scientific simulation, and large-scale data processing. The 100th percentile ranking reinforces its dominance in the database, and the 7.5% lead over the NVIDIA L40S, a strong data center GPU itself, shows the MI300X delivers top-tier compute performance.

The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile wins in scenarios where power consumption and integration matter. Its TDP is 65 W, compared to 750 W for the MI300X. It is an IGP, meaning it is integrated into the processor package, while the MI300X is an OAM Module. The Intel part uses a Ring Bus interface and relies on System Shared memory, which suits a mobile platform where dedicated memory and high power delivery are not available. Its FP32 throughput is 3.942 TFLOPS, and its FP16 output is 7.885 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, which doubles the rate for half-precision work. The pixel rate is 52.80 GPixel/s, a figure the MI300X cannot match because its pixel rate is recorded as 0 MPixel/s. The MI300X has no ROPs, while the Intel part has 24, so for traditional rasterization and display output, the Intel Arc 112EU Mobile is the functional part. The MI300X has no display outputs at all, while the Intel part’s outputs are listed as Portable Device Dependent, which means it can drive displays in a laptop. The Intel part also supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the MI300X has no API support recorded for any of those.

Architecture Differences

The two devices use fundamentally different architectures. The AMD Instinct MI300X uses CDNA 3.0, an architecture designed for compute accelerators. The chip is named Aqua Vanjaram. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses Xe-LPG, an architecture derived from Intel’s gaming and graphics line, built for integrated use in mobile processors. The Intel chip is named Meteor Lake.

Manufacturing processes differ sharply. The MI300X is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel part is built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The MI300X contains 153,000 million transistors on a die size of 1017 mm², giving a transistor density of 150.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel part has no transistor count, die size, or density recorded in the database. The scale difference is enormous, with the MI300X being one of the largest and most complex chips in the database.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The MI300X uses 192 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective data rate. The Intel Arc 112EU Mobile uses System Shared memory, with the type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as System Shared or System Dependent. This means the Intel GPU borrows from the host system’s memory rather than having its own dedicated pool. The MI300X’s memory system is built for massive data movement, while the Intel part’s is a matter of platform convenience.

Clock behavior also differs. The MI300X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz, which is 100 MHz higher than the MI300X’s boost. However, the MI300X’s much larger execution resources make its raw throughput far higher despite a similar boost clock.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every measurable specification. The MI300X has 19,456 shading units, while the Intel Arc 112EU Mobile has 896. Texture mapping units number 1,216 for the MI300X versus 56 for the Intel part. The MI300X has no ROPs, while the Intel part has 24. The MI300X’s texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s, and the Intel part’s is 123.2 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 81.72 TFLOPS for the MI300X and 3.942 TFLOPS for the Intel part. FP16 compute is 81.72 TFLOPS for the MI300X with a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part reaches 7.885 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for the MI300X and 52.80 GPixel/s for the Intel part.

Power and physical format differ completely. The MI300X has a TDP of 750 W, while the Intel part uses 65 W. The MI300X is an OAM Module, and the Intel part is an IGP. The MI300X has no power connectors and requires a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The Intel part has no power connector data and no suggested PSU, as it draws power through the host platform. The MI300X uses PCIe 5.0 x16 for its bus interface, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus. The MI300X has no display outputs, while the Intel part has outputs described as Portable Device Dependent.

API support is exclusive to the Intel part. The Intel Arc 112EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI300X has no recorded API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan. This confirms the MI300X is not intended for conventional graphics workloads or consumer software.

Production status and release dates differ as well. The Intel part is listed as Active in production. The MI300X has no production status recorded. The MI300X was released on December 5, 2023, and the Intel Arc 112EU Mobile was released on December 13, 2023, eight days later. The MI300X’s predecessor is Radeon Instinct, while the Intel part’s predecessor is HD Graphics-M. Neither has a successor recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which device has a higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile delivers 3.942 TFLOPS. The MI300X is roughly 20 times higher in this metric.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile support modern graphics APIs?

A: Yes. The database records support for DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD Instinct MI300X has no recorded API support for any of these.

Q: How much memory does each device use?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X has 192 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses System Shared memory, with bandwidth listed as System Dependent.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300X has a TDP of 750 W and requires a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has a TDP of 65 W.

Q: Which device has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The AMD Instinct MI300X has a boost clock of 2100 MHz. The Intel part is 100 MHz higher.

Q: What is the AMD Instinct MI300X’s benchmark position relative to NVIDIA parts?

A: The MI300X scores 317,994 in Geekbench OpenCL. It is 5% behind the NVIDIA H200 NVL, 8% behind the NVIDIA B200, 7.5% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S, and 10.7% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation.