AMD Instinct MI325X vs Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the AMD Instinct MI325X and the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile shows no direct head-to-head benchmark scores, no individual benchmark wins for either part, and zero shared test results where both GPUs appear side by side. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and the win counters for both the AMD and Intel products stand at zero. As a result, there are no numeric deltas, no percentage advantages, and no per-test comparisons that can be drawn from the database for this specific pairing.

What the data does provide is a set of absolute performance specifications that establish a clear theoretical hierarchy. The AMD Instinct MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile delivers 1.792 TFLOPS FP32. This difference is substantial, with the AMD part offering roughly 45.6 times the FP32 throughput. In FP16, the AMD accelerator reaches 81.72 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel integrated GPU reaches 3.584 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, meaning the AMD part again leads by a wide margin.

Texture fill rates follow the same pattern. The AMD Instinct MI325X posts a texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s, while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile posts 56.00 GTexel/s. Pixel rates differ even more dramatically: the AMD part is recorded at 0 MPixel/s because it has no ROPs and no display outputs, while the Intel part reaches 28.00 GPixel/s. The AMD solution is not designed for rasterization output, so its pixel rate is effectively zero in the database, whereas the Intel mobile GPU is a conventional graphics processor with 16 ROPs.

Memory capacity and bandwidth also diverge sharply. The AMD Instinct MI325X uses 256 GB of HBM3e across a 8192-bit bus, producing 6.14 TB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile relies on system shared memory, with a shared bus width and bandwidth that is system dependent. No fixed numeric bandwidth exists for the Intel part in the database, so the comparison is qualitative: the AMD accelerator uses dedicated high-bandwidth memory, while the Intel part depends on the host platform.

Clock speeds tell a mixed story. The AMD part has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz, with memory running at 1500 MHz and 6 Gbps effective. The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1750 MHz, with system shared memory. The AMD part operates at a higher base clock and a higher boost clock, but the Intel part is an integrated GPU with a much lower power envelope.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Instinct MI325X and the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile are not competitors in any meaningful benchmark sense. The AMD accelerator is a dedicated compute module, classified as an OAM Module, with a 1000 W TDP, no display outputs, and no graphics API support. The Intel part is an integrated GPU within the Meteor Lake chip, classified as an IGP, with a 65 W TDP, portable device dependent outputs, and full DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support.

For workloads that require massive FP32 or FP16 compute, high memory bandwidth, and large memory capacity, the AMD Instinct MI325X is the only viable option between these two. Its 256 GB HBM3e pool, 6.14 TB/s bandwidth, and 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 throughput place it in a category that the Intel integrated GPU cannot approach. The Intel part, by contrast, is built for rendering and display tasks on mobile devices, with 16 ROPs, 28.00 GPixel/s pixel rate, and a full graphics API stack.

Users who need to run games, OpenGL applications, or Vulkan workloads on a mobile platform should select the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile, as the AMD part has no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support recorded. Users who need server-class compute acceleration, such as AI inference or HPC simulation, should select the AMD Instinct MI325X, as the Intel part lacks the compute scale and memory subsystem for such tasks.

The benchmark database shows no shared tests, so any performance ranking must rely on architecture and specification data. The AMD part leads in raw compute, memory bandwidth, and memory capacity. The Intel part leads in graphics API compatibility, pixel output, and power efficiency. Neither part can substitute for the other in its intended role.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI325X is built on the CDNA 3.0 architecture, codename Aqua Vanjaram, and belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation. It uses a 5 nm process at TSMC and packs 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile uses the Xe-LPG architecture, part of the Meteor Lake chip, and belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) generation. It uses a 10 nm process at Intel. The database lists no transistor count, die size, or density for the Intel part.

The AMD architecture is optimized for compute acceleration. It has 19,456 shading units, 1,216 TMUs, and 0 ROPs, which aligns with its lack of display outputs and rasterization hardware. It has no RT cores and no tensor cores listed. The Intel architecture is a traditional GPU with 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. It also has no RT cores or tensor cores listed. The AMD part supports no graphics APIs, while the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The memory architecture differs fundamentally. The AMD part uses HBM3e with a 8192-bit bus and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel part uses system shared memory with a shared bus width and system dependent bandwidth. The AMD part has no display outputs; the Intel part has portable device dependent outputs. The AMD part connects via PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Intel part connects via a Ring Bus.

Specification Differences

The two products differ across nearly every specification field in the database. The AMD Instinct MI325X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1750 MHz. The AMD memory clock is 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective, while the Intel memory clock is system shared.

Shading units: 19,456 on AMD versus 512 on Intel. TMUs: 1,216 on AMD versus 32 on Intel. ROPs: 0 on AMD versus 16 on Intel. Pixel rate: 0 MPixel/s on AMD versus 28.00 GPixel/s on Intel. Texture rate: 2,553.6 GTexel/s on AMD versus 56.00 GTexel/s on Intel. FP32: 81.72 TFLOPS on AMD versus 1.792 TFLOPS on Intel. FP16: 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) on AMD versus 3.584 TFLOPS (2:1) on Intel.

TDP: 1000 W on AMD versus 65 W on Intel. Slot width: OAM Module on AMD versus IGP on Intel. Power connectors: none on AMD versus none listed on Intel. Suggested PSU: 1400 W on AMD versus none listed on Intel. Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 on AMD versus Ring Bus on Intel. Display outputs: no outputs on AMD versus portable device dependent on Intel.

APIs: AMD has N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. Intel has DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Process node: 5 nm on AMD versus 10 nm on Intel. Foundry: TSMC on AMD versus Intel on Intel. Transistors: 153,000 million on AMD versus none listed on Intel. Die size: 1017 mm² on AMD versus none listed on Intel. Transistor density: 150.4M per mm² on AMD versus none listed on Intel.

Release date: 2024-10-09 for AMD versus 2023-12-13 for Intel. Production status: not listed for AMD versus active for Intel. Predecessor: Radeon Instinct for AMD versus HD Graphics-M for Intel. Successor: none listed for either part. Launch MSRP: not listed for either part.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile delivers 1.792 TFLOPS FP32. The AMD part leads by a large margin.

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI325X support graphics APIs like DirectX or Vulkan?

A: No. The database lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A for the AMD Instinct MI325X. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What type of memory does each GPU use?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X uses 256 GB of HBM3e with an 8192-bit bus and 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile uses system shared memory with a system shared bus width and system dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X has a boost clock of 2100 MHz. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile has a boost clock of 1750 MHz.

Q: Which GPU has display outputs?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X has no display outputs. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile has portable device dependent outputs.

Q: What is the power consumption difference between the two?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X has a TDP of 1000 W. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile has a TDP of 65 W.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI325X wins in every compute-oriented metric recorded in the database. It leads in FP32 throughput with 81.72 TFLOPS versus 1.792 TFLOPS. It leads in FP16 throughput with 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 3.584 TFLOPS (2:1). It leads in texture rate with 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 56.00 GTexel/s. It leads in memory capacity with 256 GB versus system shared. It leads in memory bandwidth with 6.14 TB/s versus system dependent. It leads in shading units with 19,456 versus 512. It leads in TMUs with 1,216 versus 32. It leads in base clock with 1000 MHz versus 300 MHz, and in boost clock with 2100 MHz versus 1750 MHz.

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile wins in graphics output and API compatibility. It has 16 ROPs while the AMD part has 0. It has a pixel rate of 28.00 GPixel/s while the AMD part has 0 MPixel/s. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD part lists N/A for all three. It has display outputs (portable device dependent) while the AMD part has none. It has a much lower TDP of 65 W versus 1000 W. It also has an active production status, while the AMD part has none listed.

The database shows no benchmark scores for either part, so these wins are specification-based. The AMD Instinct MI325X is suited for compute accelerators in server or OAM module form factors, using PCIe 5.0 x16, with a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile is suited for mobile integrated graphics, connected via Ring Bus, with no dedicated power connector required. The release dates differ, with the AMD part released on 2024-10-09 and the Intel part on 2023-12-13. The predecessor names also differ: Radeon Instinct for AMD and HD Graphics-M for Intel.