AMD Radeon 680M vs Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the AMD Radeon 680M and the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile, though the comparison is limited by the absence of direct head-to-head benchmark results. The AMD Radeon 680M has three recorded benchmark scores: 378 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 23,468 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 21,965 in Geekbench Vulkan. These results produce an average benchmark score of 15,270. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, resulting in an average benchmark score of zero. This absence of data means direct performance comparisons cannot be established through measured results.

The AMD Radeon 680M's average score of 15,270 places it at the 57th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals, based on average scores, include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 at 15,283 (0.1% behind the 680M), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 at 15,290 (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM at 15,199 (0.5% ahead of the 680M), and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 at 15,171 (0.7% ahead). These narrow deltas indicate that the 680M performs within a very tight band around these discrete desktop GPUs, despite being an integrated graphics processor. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has no nearest rivals listed and sits at the 50th percentile, which reflects its unmeasured status rather than actual performance data.

The Geekbench OpenCL score of 23,468 for the 680M represents its strongest measured result, while the Vulkan score of 21,965 trails by approximately 6.4% in the database's recorded figures. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 378 is substantially lower, reflecting the heavier graphical workload of that test. Without corresponding Intel scores, the database cannot produce a head-to-head win count for either product. The winsA and winsB fields both report zero, confirming that no direct comparison benchmarks exist in the recorded data.

FAQ

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

A: The 680M's average score of 15,270 places it 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 (15,283) and 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (15,290). It sits 0.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (15,199) and 0.7% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7600 (15,171). All four rivals fall within a 0.7% delta, indicating near-parity performance.

Q: What benchmark scores does the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile have?

A: The database lists no benchmark scores for the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile. Its benchmark array is empty, and its average benchmark score is recorded as zero. The GPU sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, but this figure reflects the absence of measured data rather than a performance ranking.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each GPU among all GPUs in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M ranks at the 57th percentile among all GPUs, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile ranks at the 50th percentile. The 680M's ranking is supported by its three recorded benchmark scores, whereas the Intel GPU's ranking is based on no measured results.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M has 768 shading units, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has 256 shading units. This gives the 680M a 3x advantage in shading unit count, which directly influences its higher pixel rate and texture rate figures.

Q: What are the pixel and texture rates for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M achieves a pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 105.6 GTexel/s. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile achieves a pixel rate of 20.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 40.00 GTexel/s. The 680M delivers 3.5x the pixel throughput and 2.6x the texture throughput.

Q: What is the FP32 performance for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M delivers 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile delivers 1,280.0 GFLOPS, which is equivalent to 1.28 TFLOPS. The 680M provides approximately 2.6x the single-precision floating-point throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 680M wins in every measurable performance category where data exists. Its FP32 throughput of 3.379 TFLOPS exceeds the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile's 1,280.0 GFLOPS, making it the stronger choice for general compute workloads and graphics rendering that rely on single-precision math. The 680M's pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s versus 20.00 GPixel/s gives it a clear advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios, such as high-resolution rendering with heavy overdraw. Its texture rate of 105.6 GTexel/s versus 40.00 GTexel/s similarly favors the AMD part in texture-heavy scenes.

The 680M also holds advantages in core resource counts. With 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, it offers substantially more parallel execution resources than the Intel GPU's 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The ray tracing hardware also differs: the 680M includes 12 RT cores, while the Intel part includes 2 RT cores. This 6x difference in RT core count suggests the 680M can handle ray-traced effects with less performance degradation, though no direct benchmark data confirms this.

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile wins in efficiency metrics based on the recorded specifications. Its TDP of 25 W is half the 50 W TDP of the AMD Radeon 680M. This makes the Intel GPU the more power-conscious option for slim portable devices where thermal and battery constraints take priority over raw performance. The Intel GPU also uses a 3 nm process node from Intel, compared to the 6 nm TSMC node used by the AMD part, which contributes to its lower power envelope. However, without benchmark scores, the actual performance per watt cannot be quantified from the database.

The Intel GPU also carries a higher boost clock of 2500 MHz versus the 680M's 2200 MHz boost clock. This clock advantage does not translate into higher throughput, as the 680M's larger execution resource pool more than compensates. The base clock difference is starker: 300 MHz for the Intel part versus 2000 MHz for the AMD part, indicating the Intel GPU relies on aggressive boosting to reach its operating frequencies.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field in the database. The AMD Radeon 680M uses the Rembrandt+ chip with an RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile uses the Wildcat Lake chip with an Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel. The AMD part integrates 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, while the Intel part's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The AMD Radeon 680M has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. The Intel part's boost clock is 300 MHz higher than the AMD part's, but its base clock is 1700 MHz lower.

Core counts show a consistent AMD advantage. The 680M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 RT cores. The Intel GPU has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 2 RT cores. The AMD part also has a higher pixel rate (70.40 GPixel/s versus 20.00 GPixel/s), texture rate (105.6 GTexel/s versus 40.00 GTexel/s), and FP32 throughput (3.379 TFLOPS versus 1,280.0 GFLOPS). FP16 performance follows the same pattern: 6.758 TFLOPS for the AMD part versus 2.560 TFLOPS for the Intel part.

Power consumption differs by a factor of two. The AMD Radeon 680M has a TDP of 50 W, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has a TDP of 25 W. Both use system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The AMD part connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Intel part uses an IGP bus interface. Both are IGP slot width with no power connectors, and both have portable-device-dependent display outputs.

Release timing also differs. The AMD Radeon 680M was released on January 2, 2023, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has a release date of April 15, 2026. The AMD part lists a predecessor (Vega II IGP) and successor (Navi III IGP), while the Intel part lists a predecessor (HD Graphics-M) and no successor.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 680M is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, which the database identifies as part of the Navi II IGP generation, specifically the Rembrandt Mobile variant. This architecture uses a 6 nm TSMC process and integrates 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 63.0 million transistors per mm². The RDNA 2.0 design employs a unified shader array with 768 shading units organized into 48 TMUs and 32 ROPs, alongside 12 dedicated RT cores for hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile is built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, part of the Arc Graphics-M generation based on the Wildcat Lake chip. This architecture uses a 3 nm Intel process. The database records no transistor count, die size, or transistor density for this chip. The Xe3-LPG design uses 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, with 2 RT cores. The architecture is designed for lower power consumption, reflected in its 25 W TDP, while still supporting the same API feature set as the AMD part.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, meaning they expose identical API capabilities to software. The architectural differences manifest primarily in execution resource counts and power efficiency rather than feature support. The AMD part's RDNA 2.0 implementation provides substantially more shading, texturing, and rasterization hardware, while the Intel part's Xe3-LPG implementation focuses on reducing power draw through a smaller process node and a leaner execution configuration.

The memory architecture is identical in specification: both use system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. This means both GPUs rely on the host system's main memory rather than dedicated VRAM, making actual memory performance dependent on the platform. The AMD part's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface provides a dedicated connection to the host, while the Intel part's IGP bus interface indicates a fully integrated design without a separate bus link.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear performance hierarchy: the AMD Radeon 680M is substantially faster in every measured or specified compute metric. Its FP32 throughput of 3.379 TFLOPS is approximately 2.6x the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile's 1,280.0 GFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s is 3.5x the Intel part's 20.00 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 105.6 GTexel/s is 2.6x the Intel part's 40.00 GTexel/s. The 680M also carries 3x the shading units, 3x the TMUs, 4x the ROPs, and 6x the RT cores.

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile counters with a 25 W TDP, exactly half the AMD part's 50 W TDP, and a 3 nm process node compared to 6 nm. These factors position it for power-sensitive portable designs where the 680M's performance advantage is unnecessary. The Intel part's higher boost clock of 2500 MHz versus 2200 MHz does not compensate for its smaller execution resource pool.

Buyers seeking maximum integrated graphics performance should select the AMD Radeon 680M, as the database shows it performing within 0.7% of discrete desktop GPUs such as the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM and Radeon RX 7600. Buyers prioritizing minimal power draw in a thin-and-light system should select the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile, as its 25 W TDP and 3 nm process represent the more efficient design. The absence of benchmark data for the Intel part means its real-world performance remains unverified in the database, while the AMD part's three recorded scores provide concrete evidence of its capability.