AMD Radeon 680M vs Intel Arc G3 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the recorded benchmark scores for the AMD Radeon 680M?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M scores 378 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 23,468 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 21,965 in Geekbench Vulkan, with an average benchmark score of 15,270.

Q: Does the Intel Arc G3 have any benchmark entries in the database?

A: No. The Intel Arc G3 has an empty benchmark list, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals recorded. Its percentile versus all GPUs is 50.

Q: What is the AMD Radeon 680M's percentile among all GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M sits at the 57th percentile versus all GPUs, placing it slightly above the midpoint of the recorded GPU distribution.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 680M compare to its closest rivals in average score?

A: The data shows the 680M is within 0.7% of four rivals: it trails the GeForce GTX 580 by 0.1%, trails the RTX 2060 by 0.1%, leads the RTX 3050 OEM by 0.5%, and leads the RX 7600 by 0.7%.

Q: What are the process nodes for the two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M uses a 6 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Arc G3 uses a 3 nm process from Intel.

Q: What is the thermal design power difference between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M has a TDP of 50 W, while the Intel Arc G3 has a TDP of 25 W.

The Verdict

The database contains complete performance records for the AMD Radeon 680M, with three benchmark entries and an average score of 15,270. The Intel Arc G3 has no recorded measurements, no average score, and no rival comparisons. Any selection between the two must rely on the architectural and specification differences, since direct performance data for the Arc G3 is absent.

For users who need a GPU with verified performance data, the AMD Radeon 680M is the only option with measured results. Its 57th percentile rank and average score of 15,270 place it in competition with discrete GPUs such as the RTX 2060 and RX 7600, with delta percentages of -0.1% and 0.7% respectively. That level of measured performance gives a concrete baseline for software compatibility and driver validation.

The Intel Arc G3, by contrast, offers a higher theoretical compute ceiling. Its FP32 throughput of 6.144 TFLOPS is nearly double the 680M's 3.379 TFLOPS, and its 1,280 shading units exceed the 680M's 768. However, no benchmark data confirms whether that theoretical advantage translates into real application performance. The Arc G3 also operates at a much lower 25 W TDP, which may suit power-constrained portable designs, but the absence of measurements prevents a performance verdict.

The choice depends on whether the user prioritizes measured, verifiable performance or raw specification potential. The data supports the 680M as the proven performer; the Arc G3 remains an unmeasured specification sheet.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark list between the AMD Radeon 680M and Intel Arc G3 is empty, and the win counts for both GPUs are zero. No direct comparison measurements exist in the database. This means the only quantitative performance anchor available is the AMD Radeon 680M's individual benchmark suite.

The 680M's strongest recorded result is in Geekbench OpenCL at 23,468 points, which is about 6.8% higher than its Geekbench Vulkan score of 21,965. Both scores indicate solid general-purpose compute performance for an integrated GPU. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 378 is a modern DirectX 12 workload result, and it contributes to the average of 15,270. That average places the 680M at the 57th percentile, and its nearest rivals are clustered within 0.7%, showing that the 680M performs essentially on par with the GeForce GTX 580, RTX 2060, RTX 3050 OEM, and RX 7600 in aggregate score.

Because the Arc G3 has no benchmark entries, no head-to-head wins can be assigned to either side. The Intel Arc G3's average benchmark score of 0 and empty rival list mean there is no recorded basis for comparing its real-world performance against the 680M or any other GPU. The theoretical FP32 advantage of the Arc G3 (6.144 TFLOPS versus 3.379 TFLOPS) remains unverified by any database measurement.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ substantially across nearly every specification field recorded.

Clock speeds: the AMD Radeon 680M runs at a base clock of 2000 MHz and boosts to 2200 MHz. The Intel Arc G3 runs at a base of 300 MHz and boosts to 2400 MHz. The Arc G3 has a much lower base clock but a 200 MHz higher boost clock.

Shading units: the 680M has 768 shading units, while the Arc G3 has 1,280, a 66.7% higher count.

Texture mapping units: the 680M has 48 TMUs, the Arc G3 has 40 TMUs, a 20% advantage for the 680M.

Raster operation units: the 680M has 32 ROPs, the Arc G3 has 20 ROPs, a 60% advantage for the 680M.

Ray tracing cores: the 680M has 12 RT cores, the Arc G3 has 10 RT cores.

Pixel rate: the 680M achieves 70.40 GPixel/s, the Arc G3 achieves 48.00 GPixel/s. The 680M leads by about 46.7%.

Texture rate: the 680M achieves 105.6 GTexel/s, the Arc G3 achieves 96.00 GTexel/s. The 680M leads by 10%.

FP32 throughput: the 680M delivers 3.379 TFLOPS, the Arc G3 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS. The Arc G3 leads by about 81.8%.

FP16 throughput: the 680M delivers 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1), the Arc G3 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1). The Arc G3 leads by about 81.9%.

TDP: the 680M is rated at 50 W, the Arc G3 at 25 W. The Arc G3 uses half the power budget.

Transistors and die size: the 680M has 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die with a density of 63.0M / mm². The Arc G3's transistor count, die size, and density are listed as unknown or null.

Process node: the 680M uses TSMC's 6 nm process, the Arc G3 uses Intel's 3 nm process.

Bus interface: the 680M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, the Arc G3 uses IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no PCIe lane specification.

Both GPUs share several traits: both are IGP slot width, both use System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth, both have no power connectors, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and both have portable-device-dependent display outputs.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 680M is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, using the Rembrandt+ chip, and belongs to the Navi II IGP generation (Rembrandt Mobile). Its predecessor is listed as Vega II IGP, and its successor is Navi III IGP. The 680M uses a 6 nm TSMC process with 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die.

The Intel Arc G3 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture, based on the Panther Lake chip, and belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation. It uses a 3 nm Intel process, with transistor count and die size unknown. The Arc G3 has no recorded predecessor or successor in the database.

The architectural differences map directly to the specification gaps. The RDNA 2.0 design in the 680M emphasizes rasterization throughput, with more TMUs (48 versus 40), more ROPs (32 versus 20), and more RT cores (12 versus 10). This explains its higher pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s and higher texture rate of 105.6 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s.

The Xe3-LPG architecture in the Arc G3 emphasizes compute density. Its 1,280 shading units produce 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, nearly double the 680M's 3.379 TFLOPS, and its FP16 output of 12.29 TFLOPS similarly doubles the 680M's 6.758 TFLOPS. The 3 nm Intel process likely contributes to the Arc G3's lower 25 W TDP, though the database does not provide transistor or die size data to confirm the density relationship.

Both architectures support the same API set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The ray tracing capabilities exist in both, with the 680M carrying 12 RT cores and the Arc G3 carrying 10.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 680M wins in every category where measured data exists. Its benchmark results show an average score of 15,270 at the 57th percentile, and it has a complete set of three recorded tests. It also holds specification advantages in TMUs, ROPs, RT cores, pixel rate, and texture rate. The 680M's 70.40 GPixel/s pixel throughput and 105.6 GTexel/s texture throughput suggest it is better suited for traditional rasterization workloads, and its 12 RT cores provide ray tracing support with more cores than the Arc G3.

The Intel Arc G3 wins in raw compute specifications. Its 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 figures are approximately double the 680M's corresponding values, and its 1,280 shading units give it a 66.7% unit advantage. The 25 W TDP is half the 680M's 50 W rating, which indicates a more power-efficient design for thermally constrained portable systems. The 3 nm Intel process is one generation ahead of the 680M's 6 nm TSMC process in lithography.

However, the Arc G3 has no benchmark entries, no average score, and no rival comparisons. Its percentile of 50 is a placeholder value, not a measured result. The database cannot confirm whether the Arc G3's compute advantage produces faster real-world performance. The 680M, by contrast, has verified scores that place it within 0.7% of discrete GPUs like the RTX 2060 and RX 7600.

For applications that rely on pixel-fill and texture throughput, such as traditional rendering pipelines, the 680M's higher pixel rate and texture rate give it a structural advantage. For compute-heavy workloads that scale with shading unit count and FP32 throughput, the Arc G3's specification sheet suggests a theoretical advantage, but no measured confirmation exists. The recorded data supports the 680M as the only GPU with verified performance in this comparison.