AMD Instinct MI355X vs Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for the AMD Instinct MI355X and the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile. Both parts show an average benchmark score of zero, and neither has a list of nearest rivals with comparative scores or delta percentages. This absence of measured data is itself informative when placed alongside the specification records. The MI355X delivers 78.64 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Arc 48EU Mobile delivers 1,382.4 GFLOPS, which is 1.3824 TFLOPS. The ratio between these two figures is approximately 56.9x in favor of the Instinct part. Similarly, texture rate for the MI355X is 2,457.6 GTexel/s versus 43.20 GTexel/s for the Intel part, a margin of roughly 56.9x again. Pixel rate tells a different story: the MI355X is recorded at 0 MPixel/s, while the Arc 48EU Mobile produces 14.40 GPixel/s. This indicates that the Instinct accelerator is not designed for traditional rasterized pixel output, whereas the Intel integrated part retains conventional graphics pipeline capabilities.

The lack of benchmark scores means the database cannot assign a win count to either product. WinsA is zero and winsB is zero. Percentile rankings are identical at 50 for both, which is the neutral midpoint of the database distribution. Without measured workloads, any head-to-head numeric comparison must rely on the raw compute and memory figures stored in the specification fields. The FP16 comparison also shows divergence: the MI355X records 78.64 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the Arc 48EU Mobile records 2.765 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. These ratios indicate different execution models for reduced precision arithmetic. The MI355X exhibits symmetric throughput across FP32 and FP16, while the Intel part doubles its throughput when operating in FP16 mode.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI355X uses the MI350 256CU chip built on CDNA 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile uses the Meteor Lake chip with Xe-LPG architecture, manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel. The transistor count for the AMD part is 185,000 million transistors, which is 185 billion. The Intel part has no transistor count recorded in the database, nor does it have a die size or transistor density entry. The AMD die size is 2380 mm² with a transistor density of 77.7M per mm². The Intel part lacks these physical measurements entirely.

Shading unit counts differ substantially. The MI355X contains 16,384 shading units, while the Arc 48EU Mobile contains 384. Texture mapping units are 1,024 on the AMD side versus 24 on the Intel side. Render output units are recorded as 0 for the AMD part and 8 for the Intel part. The MI355X has no pixel rate output, confirming its role as a compute accelerator without a display or rasterization path. The Arc 48EU Mobile does have 8 ROPs and a measurable pixel rate of 14.40 GPixel/s.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The MI355X uses 288 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth figure. The MI355X memory clock is recorded as 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective data rate. The Arc 48EU Mobile has no dedicated memory clock, as it relies on the host system's memory subsystem.

Clock speeds differ as well. The AMD base clock is 1000 MHz with a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The Intel base clock is 300 MHz with a boost clock of 1800 MHz. The power envelope shows a massive gap: the MI355X has a TDP of 1400 W, while the Arc 48EU Mobile has a TDP of 28 W. That is a 50x difference in thermal design power. The AMD part requires a suggested PSU of 1800 W, while the Intel part has no suggested PSU recorded because it is an integrated graphics processor.

The MI355X uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface and is packaged as an OAM Module with physical dimensions of 102 mm length and 165 mm width. It has no power connectors listed and no display outputs. The Arc 48EU Mobile uses a Ring Bus interface, is packaged as an IGP (integrated graphics processor), and its display outputs are portable device dependent. Physical dimensions are not recorded for the Intel part.

API support also differs. The MI355X lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A, meaning it does not expose a conventional graphics API. The Arc 48EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This confirms that the AMD product is a pure compute accelerator, while the Intel product includes a full graphics driver stack.

Release dates are recorded as 2025-06-11 for the AMD part and 2023-12-13 for the Intel part. The AMD predecessor is listed as Radeon Instinct, and the Intel predecessor is HD Graphics-M. The AMD production status is not recorded, while the Intel production status is Active.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI355X wins decisively in compute throughput, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, and FP32/FP16 arithmetic. Its 78.64 TFLOPS FP32 output positions it for dense matrix operations, large-scale inference, and scientific simulation workloads that require sustained high-precision arithmetic. The 288 GB HBM3e pool with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth allows the device to hold and stream massive datasets without host memory involvement. The 16,384 shading units and 1,024 TMUs provide parallel execution resources that dwarf the Intel part by a factor of 42.7x for shader count and 42.7x for TMU count.

The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile wins in power efficiency, graphics API compatibility, pixel output capability, and physical integration. Its 28 W TDP allows deployment in notebooks and compact systems, whereas the MI355X at 1400 W requires a server-class power delivery system and an OAM module slot. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which enables standard gaming and graphics applications. The MI355X has no API support recorded, so it cannot run conventional graphics workloads. The 14.40 GPixel/s pixel rate on the Intel part confirms it can drive displays, while the AMD part has no display outputs.

The base clock of the Intel part is 300 MHz, which is lower than the AMD base of 1000 MHz, but the Intel boost clock reaches 1800 MHz versus 2400 MHz for the AMD part. The clock ratio between the two boosts is 1.33x, which is much smaller than the compute ratio, indicating that the AMD advantage comes primarily from the larger execution resource count rather than higher clock frequency.

The MI355X supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio to FP32, meaning it does not gain extra throughput from reduced precision. The Arc 48EU Mobile supports FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning it can perform twice as many FP16 operations as FP32 operations. For workloads that tolerate FP16 precision, the Intel part offers a relative efficiency advantage, although its absolute FP16 throughput of 2.765 TFLOPS remains far below the AMD part's 78.64 TFLOPS.

The AMD part has no ROPs and a pixel rate of zero, confirming that it does not rasterize geometry. The Intel part has 8 ROPs, enough for basic display composition and light 2D workloads. The MI355X texture rate of 2,457.6 GTexel/s indicates its TMUs are intended for compute-style texturing or tensor operations rather than traditional game rendering.

FAQ

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference between the two products?

A: The AMD Instinct MI355X delivers 78.64 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile delivers 1,382.4 GFLOPS, which equals 1.3824 TFLOPS. The AMD part provides approximately 56.9x more FP32 compute.

Q: Which product supports standard graphics APIs like DirectX and Vulkan?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD Instinct MI355X lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A, so it does not expose conventional graphics APIs.

Q: How much memory does each product have, and what is the bandwidth?

A: The AMD Instinct MI355X has 288 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth figure, so no dedicated capacity or bandwidth is recorded.

Q: What is the power consumption of each product?

A: The AMD Instinct MI355X has a TDP of 1400 W and requires a suggested PSU of 1800 W. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has a TDP of 28 W and no suggested PSU is recorded.

Q: Do both products have render output units?

A: No. The AMD Instinct MI355X has 0 ROPs and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has 8 ROPs and a pixel rate of 14.40 GPixel/s.

Q: What are the release dates for these products?

A: The AMD Instinct MI355X has a release date of 2025-06-11. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has a release date of 2023-12-13.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Instinct MI355X | Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | MI350 256CU | Meteor Lake |

| Architecture | CDNA 4.0 | Xe-LPG |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 185,000 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 2380 mm² | Not recorded |

| Transistor Density | 77.7M / mm² | Not recorded |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2400 MHz | 1800 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz, 8 Gbps effective | System Shared |

| Memory Size | 288 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | HBM3e | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 8.19 TB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 16384 | 384 |

| TMUs | 1024 | 24 |

| ROPs | 0 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 14.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,457.6 GTexel/s | 43.20 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 78.64 TFLOPS | 1,382.4 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 78.64 TFLOPS (1:1) | 2.765 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 1400 W | 28 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | Not recorded |

| Suggested PSU | 1800 W | Not recorded |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | Ring Bus |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | N/A | 12 (12_1) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | 102 mm length, 165 mm width | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2025-06-11 | 2023-12-13 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Instinct | HD Graphics-M |

| Production Status | Not recorded | Active |

The two products occupy separate functional classes. The MI355X is a compute accelerator with no display path, no graphics API, and an enormous memory and compute footprint. The Arc 48EU Mobile is an integrated GPU with full graphics driver support, display output capability, and a minimal power footprint. The database records no overlapping benchmark results, so direct performance comparisons rely on the specification fields above. The MI355X targets data center compute environments where 1400 W power draw and OAM module packaging are acceptable. The Arc 48EU Mobile targets mobile platforms where 28 W TDP and integrated packaging are mandatory. The 50x TDP ratio, the 42.7x shading unit ratio, and the 56.9x FP32 ratio all point to the same conclusion: these products are not competitors, but they do illustrate the full range of GPU-class hardware in the database.