AMD Instinct MI350P vs Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no benchmark scores for either the AMD Instinct MI350P or the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile. With zero entries in the head-to-head benchmark table and zero wins attributed to either side, the comparative performance data is effectively empty. Both parts sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs in the database, though this percentile reflects their position in the catalog rather than any measured performance outcome.

The absence of benchmark numbers means no direct frame-rate, compute, or throughput comparisons can be drawn from the recorded data. The AMD Instinct MI350P lists an FP32 throughput of 36.04 TFLOPS and an FP16 figure of 36.04 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile lists FP32 at 1,382.4 GFLOPS and FP16 at 2.765 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). These raw specification figures are not benchmark results, but they indicate a massive computational gap: the MI350P delivers roughly 26 times the FP32 throughput on paper, a difference that would dominate any realistic workload comparison if benchmarks were present.

Similarly, texture and pixel rates show the scale of disparity. The MI350P records a texture rate of 1,126.4 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, which reflects its compute-oriented design with no display outputs. The Intel part records 43.20 GTexel/s and 14.40 GPixel/s, the latter being meaningful because it has actual rasterization hardware and display capabilities. Without benchmark data, these numbers stand as the only quantitative comparison available, and they point to entirely different product categories rather than direct competitors.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the AMD Instinct MI350P is a data-center compute accelerator with no display outputs, no graphics API support (DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan are all listed as N/A), and a 600 W TDP. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile is an integrated graphics processor for laptops, running at 28 W with full DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, plus portable-device-dependent display outputs. These are not interchangeable products.

The MI350P targets workloads that require massive memory capacity and bandwidth: 144 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, meaning its performance scales with the host laptop's RAM configuration. Anyone building a server for AI training or large-scale compute would select the MI350P. Anyone assembling a thin-and-light laptop would use the Intel integrated part. The data shows no overlap in use cases, and the lack of benchmark results means no surprise upsets are recorded.

Architecture Differences

The MI350P uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture on a 3 nm TSMC process, with 73,000 million transistors on a 1190 mm² die. Transistor density calculates to 61.3M per mm². The chip is labeled MI350 128CU, and it belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile uses the Xe-LPG architecture on Intel's 10 nm process, with the chip listed as Meteor Lake and the generation as Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake). Its transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

The MI350P has 8192 shading units, 512 texture mapping units, and 0 ROPs. The Intel part has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The pixel rate for the MI350P is 0 MPixel/s because it has no raster output pipeline, while the Intel part manages 14.40 GPixel/s. The texture rate difference is similarly stark: 1,126.4 GTexel/s versus 43.20 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture separates the two completely. The MI350P uses 144 GB of HBM3e with an 8192-bit bus and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, running at 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective. The Intel part uses system shared memory with a system shared bus width and system dependent bandwidth. Clock behavior also differs: the MI350P runs at 1000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while the Intel part runs at 300 MHz base and 1800 MHz boost. The MI350P has no display outputs, whereas the Intel part's outputs are portable device dependent.

The bus interface differs as well. The MI350P uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus. The MI350P is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, with a single 16-pin power connector and a 1000 W suggested PSU. The Intel part is an IGP with no power connectors, no dimensions recorded, and no suggested PSU.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P has 8192 shading units. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has 384 shading units.

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI350P support DirectX?

A: No. The database lists DirectX as N/A for the MI350P. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The MI350P has 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth from 144 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus. The Intel part uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, so no fixed figure is recorded.

Q: What is the power consumption of each?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P has a TDP of 600 W. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has a TDP of 28 W.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P boosts to 2200 MHz. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile boosts to 1800 MHz.

Q: Can either GPU output to a display?

A: The MI350P has no display outputs. The Intel part has portable device dependent display outputs, meaning it works with laptop panels and connected displays as the host system allows.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI350P wins in every compute-heavy specification recorded. Its FP32 throughput of 36.04 TFLOPS is more than 26 times the Intel part's 1,382.4 GFLOPS. Its FP16 throughput matches its FP32 at 36.04 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part's FP16 is 2.765 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The MI350P's texture rate of 1,126.4 GTexel/s is roughly 26 times the Intel part's 43.20 GTexel/s. Memory capacity and bandwidth are in a different class entirely: 144 GB at 8.19 TB/s versus shared system memory. The MI350P also wins on process node maturity at 3 nm versus 10 nm, and it has a larger die at 1190 mm² with 73,000 million transistors.

The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile wins in areas tied to client graphics and integration. It has 8 ROPs versus the MI350P's 0, enabling actual pixel output. Its pixel rate of 14.40 GPixel/s is meaningful for display workloads, while the MI350P records 0 MPixel/s. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the MI350P lists N/A for all three APIs. The Intel part consumes 28 W versus 600 W, making it viable for battery-powered devices. It uses a Ring Bus interface, which suits integrated designs, and its display outputs are portable device dependent. The Intel part also has an active production status, while the MI350P's production status is not recorded.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every recorded field. Process node: 3 nm (TSMC) for the MI350P versus 10 nm (Intel) for the Arc part. Transistor count: 73,000 million for the MI350P, not recorded for the Intel part. Die size: 1190 mm² for the MI350P, not recorded for the Intel part. Transistor density: 61.3M per mm² for the MI350P, not recorded for the Intel part.

Clocks: MI350P base 1000 MHz, boost 2200 MHz, memory 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). Intel part base 300 MHz, boost 1800 MHz, memory system shared.

Memory: MI350P has 144 GB HBM3e, 8192-bit bus, 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. Intel part has system shared capacity, type, bus width, and system dependent bandwidth.

Shader resources: MI350P has 8192 shading units, 512 TMUs, 0 ROPs. Intel part has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, 8 ROPs.

Rates: MI350P pixel rate 0 MPixel/s, texture rate 1,126.4 GTexel/s. Intel part pixel rate 14.40 GPixel/s, texture rate 43.20 GTexel/s.

Compute: MI350P FP32 36.04 TFLOPS, FP16 36.04 TFLOPS (1:1). Intel part FP32 1,382.4 GFLOPS, FP16 2.765 TFLOPS (2:1).

Power and physical: MI350P TDP 600 W, dual-slot, 1x 16-pin connector, 1000 W suggested PSU, PCIe 5.0 x16, dimensions 267 mm x 111 mm x 40 mm. Intel part TDP 28 W, IGP slot width, no power connectors, no suggested PSU, Ring Bus interface, no dimensions recorded.

APIs: MI350P lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. Intel part lists DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4.

Outputs: MI350P has no display outputs. Intel part has portable device dependent display outputs.

Release timing: MI350P release date is 2026-05-06, Intel part is 2023-12-13. The MI350P's predecessor is Radeon Instinct; the Intel part's predecessor is HD Graphics-M. Neither has a recorded successor. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP.