AMD Instinct MI325X vs Intel Arc 140T Mobile Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI325X and Intel Arc 140T Mobile occupy entirely different segments of the GPU landscape, and the recorded data reflects this separation clearly. The MI325X is an OAM module designed for compute acceleration, with zero display outputs and no graphics API support. The Arc 140T Mobile is an integrated graphics processor embedded in the Arrow Lake-H chip, carrying full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, and its display outputs are portable device dependent.

In raw compute throughput, the MI325X dominates every metric. Its FP32 performance is 81.72 TFLOPS, while the Arc 140T Mobile delivers 4.813 TFLOPS. That is a 17x gap in single-precision floating-point work. The MI325X also posts an FP16 figure of 81.72 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning it treats FP16 and FP32 identically. The Arc 140T Mobile reaches 9.626 TFLOPS in FP16 but at a 2:1 ratio, indicating it packs two FP16 operations into the same hardware path used for one FP32 op. For workloads that rely on reduced precision, the MI325X still holds a lead of roughly 8.5x.

The Arc 140T Mobile wins decisively in graphics-oriented tasks. Its pixel rate is 75.20 GPixel/s, while the MI325X records 0 MPixel/s because it has no ROPs. Texture rate favors the MI325X at 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 150.4 GTexel/s, but that advantage is irrelevant for rasterization since the MI325X cannot output frames. The Arc 140T Mobile includes 8 ray tracing cores; the MI325X lists no RT cores at all.

Memory configuration reinforces the split. The MI325X carries 256 GB of HBM3e over an 8192-bit bus, producing 6.14 TB/s of bandwidth. The Arc 140T Mobile uses System Shared memory, with bandwidth described as System Dependent. For large-scale data movement, such as AI training or scientific simulation, the MI325X provides a dedicated, massive memory pool. For typical laptop graphics, the Arc 140T Mobile leverages whatever system memory is available, with no dedicated VRAM.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different architectural families. The MI325X uses CDNA 3.0, AMD's compute-optimized design, built on the Aqua Vanjaram chip. The Arc 140T Mobile uses Xe-LPG+, Intel's graphics architecture, implemented in the Arrow Lake-H chip. Both are manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the similarity ends there.

The MI325X integrates 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The Arc 140T Mobile's transistor count and die size are unknown in the database. The MI325X is a discrete accelerator with a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface and no power connectors, drawing a 1000 W TDP with a suggested power supply of 1400 W. The Arc 140T Mobile is an IGP with a 35 W TDP, no separate power connectors, and no suggested PSU listed.

Shader resources differ by an order of magnitude. The MI325X has 19,456 shading units and 1,216 TMUs, but zero ROPs. The Arc 140T Mobile has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The presence of ROPs in the Intel part confirms its role in actual pixel output; their absence in the AMD part confirms its role as a pure compute engine.

Clock behavior also contrasts sharply. The MI325X runs at a 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost, with memory clocked at 1500 MHz or 6 Gbps effective. The Arc 140T Mobile has a 300 MHz base and 2350 MHz boost, with system-shared memory. The MI325X's higher base clock reflects a sustained compute workload design, while the Arc 140T Mobile's low base clock allows power saving in mobile contexts, boosting when needed.

API support is another major divergence. The MI325X lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, meaning it is not intended for conventional graphics rendering. The Arc 140T Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This is the clearest architectural signal of their intended use cases: one is an accelerator without a display path, the other is a full graphics solution for mobile devices.

Release timing shows they are near-contemporaries. The MI325X appeared on 2024-10-09, and the Arc 140T Mobile on 2025-01-12. The MI325X's predecessor is Radeon Instinct, while the Arc 140T Mobile succeeds HD Graphics-M. Neither has a listed successor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between these two parts, and both have zero recorded benchmark scores. Their percentileVsAllGpus values are identical at 50, indicating the database places both at the midpoint of all tracked GPUs, though this is likely a default placement given the absence of measured results.

The meaningful comparison comes from specification-level analysis. In FP32 compute, the MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS versus 4.813 TFLOPS for the Arc 140T Mobile. That is a 16.98x advantage. In FP16, the MI325X again posts 81.72 TFLOPS, while the Arc 140T Mobile reaches 9.626 TFLOPS, a 8.49x advantage. These are the largest wins for the AMD part.

Texture throughput favors the MI325X at 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 150.4 GTexel/s, a 16.98x margin that mirrors the FP32 ratio. This is consistent with the MI325X's 1,216 TMUs against 64 TMUs, a 19x difference in texture unit count.

The Arc 140T Mobile's only clear win is pixel rate. It records 75.20 GPixel/s, while the MI325X records 0 MPixel/s. This is not a close contest; the AMD part simply has no ROPs and cannot rasterize. The Intel part also has 8 ray tracing cores, while the MI325X has none listed.

Memory bandwidth is not a contest either. The MI325X offers 6.14 TB/s from HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus. The Arc 140T Mobile's bandwidth is System Dependent, so no fixed number exists. The 256 GB capacity of the MI325X dwarfs any system-shared allocation typical of an IGP.

Clock speed comparison shows the Arc 140T Mobile boosting 250 MHz higher than the MI325X (2350 MHz versus 2100 MHz), but this does little to close the compute gap given the massive difference in shader count. The MI325X's base clock of 1000 MHz is more than three times the Arc 140T Mobile's 300 MHz base, reflecting different power and thermal envelopes: 1000 W versus 35 W.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward split: the AMD Instinct MI325X is for compute workloads that demand maximum FP32 or FP16 throughput, enormous memory capacity, and extreme bandwidth. Its 81.72 TFLOPS in both precisions, 256 GB of HBM3e, and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth position it for AI training, scientific computing, and other data-parallel tasks. The absence of display outputs and graphics API support means it is not a rendering device at all.

The Intel Arc 140T Mobile is for graphics and general mobile computing. Its 75.20 GPixel/s pixel rate, 32 ROPs, 8 ray tracing cores, and full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support make it a functional integrated GPU. Its 35 W TDP suits laptop integration, and its system-shared memory keeps the design simple. Its FP32 output of 4.813 TFLOPS is respectable for an IGP but irrelevant compared to a dedicated accelerator.

No head-to-head benchmarks exist in the database, so no measured performance delta can be cited. Instead, the specification comparison shows that these parts target different markets so completely that a direct performance comparison would be meaningless. The MI325X wins every compute metric, and the Arc 140T Mobile wins every graphics output metric. Users requiring a display output have exactly one choice here: the Arc 140T Mobile. Users requiring maximum compute density have exactly one choice: the MI325X.

Neither part has a launch MSRP in the database, so no pricing analysis is possible. Both sit at the 50th percentile among all tracked GPUs, but with zero recorded benchmark scores, that percentile should be read as uninformative rather than indicative of real-world performance ranking.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS in FP32, versus 4.813 TFLOPS for the Intel Arc 140T Mobile, a 16.98x advantage.

Q: Can the AMD Instinct MI325X output video to a display?

A: No. The MI325X lists no display outputs and records 0 MPixel/s pixel rate, with N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The MI325X has 256 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. The Arc 140T Mobile uses System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth.

Q: Does the Intel Arc 140T Mobile support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it includes 8 ray tracing cores. The MI325X lists no ray tracing cores.

Q: What are the power requirements of each part?

A: The MI325X has a 1000 W TDP and suggests a 1400 W power supply. The Arc 140T Mobile has a 35 W TDP with no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The MI325X has 19,456 shading units, while the Arc 140T Mobile has 1,024, a 19x difference.