AMD Instinct MI355X vs Intel Arc 140V Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the AMD Instinct MI355X and the Intel Arc 140V Mobile shows no direct head-to-head benchmark results, no wins for either side, and no average benchmark scores. The database indicates both parts sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of zero for each. This absence of measured performance data means the comparison must rely entirely on the architectural and specification differences captured in the database.

The AMD Instinct MI355X delivers 78.64 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is roughly 19.7 times the 3.994 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc 140V Mobile. In FP16, the MI355X again provides 78.64 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part reaches 7.987 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, approximately one tenth of the AMD figure. Texture rate tells a similar story: the MI355X outputs 2,457.6 GTexel/s against the Intel chip's 124.8 GTexel/s, a difference of roughly 19.7x. Pixel rate is the one area where the Intel part reports a nonzero figure, 62.40 GPixel/s, while the AMD accelerator is recorded at 0 MPixel/s, reflecting its lack of display outputs and raster output units.

The Intel Arc 140V Mobile boosts to 1950 MHz from a 300 MHz base, while the AMD Instinct MI355X boosts to 2400 MHz from a 1000 MHz base. Memory capacity separates the two dramatically: the MI355X has 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192 bit bus with 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, whereas the Arc 140V uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The AMD part runs its memory at 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective speed; the Intel part has no dedicated memory clock because it relies on shared system memory.

The Verdict

Given the lack of recorded benchmark scores, the verdict follows directly from the specification data. The AMD Instinct MI355X is an accelerator-class part with 16,384 shading units, 1,024 TMUs, and zero ROPs. It is built for compute density, evidenced by its 185,000 million transistors on a 2380 mm² die, using a 3 nm TSMC process with a density of 77.7 million transistors per square millimeter. Its 1400 W TDP and 1800 W suggested PSU place it firmly in the data center segment.

The Intel Arc 140V Mobile is an integrated GPU within the Lunar Lake chip. It has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. Its 37 W TDP and IGP bus interface target mobile devices where power and space are constrained. The die size is 172 mm², also on a 3 nm TSMC process, but transistor count is listed as unknown.

The data does not support any performance equivalence between these two products. The MI355X is a discrete accelerator module with no display outputs, no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support, and no pixel rate. The Arc 140V is an integrated graphics solution with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, plus pixel and texture rates suited to rendering. Any user choosing between them would be deciding between a compute accelerator and an integrated mobile GPU, not between two competing products in the same class.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI355X wins on raw compute throughput. FP32 performance of 78.64 TFLOPS, FP16 performance of 78.64 TFLOPS, and texture rate of 2,457.6 GTexel/s are all orders of magnitude above the Intel part. Memory bandwidth of 8.19 TB/s across a 8192 bit bus with 288 GB of HBM3e gives it a massive advantage in workloads that move large datasets. The boost clock of 2400 MHz also exceeds the Intel part's 1950 MHz boost. The OAM module form factor and PCIe 5.0 x16 interface indicate a server-class installation path.

The Intel Arc 140V Mobile wins on integration and rendering features. It has 32 ROPs and 8 ray tracing cores, both absent from the MI355X. Its pixel rate of 62.40 GPixel/s is the only nonzero pixel throughput recorded between the two. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI355X records N/A for all three APIs. The 37 W TDP versus 1400 W makes it viable for battery-powered systems. Its 300 MHz base clock and 1950 MHz boost clock show a wider relative clock range, and the production status is listed as Active, while the MI355X has no production status recorded. The release date of 2024-09-23 also places it earlier in the market than the MI355X's 2025-06-11.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI355X records 78.64 TFLOPS of FP32, compared to 3.994 TFLOPS for the Intel Arc 140V Mobile.

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

A: Yes, it has 8 ray tracing cores. The AMD Instinct MI355X has no ray tracing cores recorded.

Q: What memory does the AMD Instinct MI355X use?

A: It uses 288 GB of HBM3e memory on a 8192 bit bus with 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What memory does the Intel Arc 140V Mobile use?

A: It uses system shared memory, with system dependent bandwidth and a system shared bus width.

Q: Which part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: The Intel Arc 140V Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The AMD Instinct MI355X records N/A for DirectX support.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Instinct MI355X has a 1400 W TDP, while the Intel Arc 140V Mobile has a 37 W TDP.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI355X uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture under the MI350 256CU chip, part of the Instinct (MIx) generation. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile uses the Xe2-LPG architecture under the Lunar Lake chip, part of the Arc Graphics-M (Lunar Lake) generation. Both are fabricated on a 3 nm TSMC process, but the die sizes diverge sharply: the MI355X measures 2380 mm² with 185,000 million transistors and a density of 77.7 million transistors per square millimeter, while the Intel chip measures 172 mm² with an unknown transistor count.

The AMD part is built around 16,384 shading units and 1,024 TMUs, with zero ROPs and no ray tracing cores. The Intel part has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. The MI355X has no display outputs and no supported graphics APIs, while the Arc 140V carries DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The MI355X is a discrete OAM module with a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface and no power connectors listed, requiring a suggested PSU of 1800 W. The Arc 140V is an IGP with an IGP bus interface, no power connector data, and no suggested PSU. The MI355X predecessor is Radeon Instinct, while the Arc 140V predecessor is HD Graphics-M.

Specification Differences

Clock speeds differ in both base and boost: the MI355X runs at 1000 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, while the Arc 140V runs at 300 MHz base and 1950 MHz boost. Memory clocks are recorded as 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective for the AMD part, while the Intel part lists "System Shared" for memory clock.

Memory configuration is entirely different. The MI355X has 288 GB of HBM3e, an 8192 bit bus, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The Arc 140V has system shared memory, system shared type, system shared bus width, and system dependent bandwidth.

Compute resources differ by a factor of 16 in shading units: 16,384 versus 1,024. TMUs are 1,024 versus 64. ROPs are 0 versus 32. The MI355X has no ray tracing cores, while the Arc 140V has 8. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s versus 62.40 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 2,457.6 GTexel/s versus 124.8 GTexel/s. FP32 is 78.64 TFLOPS versus 3.994 TFLOPS. FP16 is 78.64 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 7.987 TFLOPS (2:1).

Power and physical specs separate them further. The MI355X has a 1400 W TDP and 1800 W suggested PSU, while the Arc 140V has a 37 W TDP and no suggested PSU. The MI355X uses an OAM Module slot width, the Arc 140V uses IGP. Dimensions are recorded for the MI355X at 102 mm length and 165 mm width, while the Arc 140V has no dimensions listed. The MI355X has no display outputs; the Arc 140V has portable device dependent outputs. Release dates are 2025-06-11 for the MI355X and 2024-09-23 for the Arc 140V. Production status is listed as Active for the Intel part and null for the AMD part.