AMD Radeon 760M vs Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 760M compare to the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile in raw compute benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M delivers 5.323 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile delivers 1,280.0 GFLOPS (1.28 TFLOPS). The AMD part is roughly four times ahead in single-precision throughput.

Q: What do the recorded benchmark scores show for the AMD Radeon 760M?

A: The database shows an average benchmark score of 6019 for the AMD part. Its best result is 30336 in Geekbench Vulkan, followed by 20255 in Geekbench OpenCL. PassMark G3D scores 5310, and PassMark GPU Compute scores 2840.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists no benchmark entries for the Intel part, and its average benchmark score is 0. Its percentile rank versus all GPUs is 50, but without scores, direct numeric comparison is not possible.

Q: What are the architectural differences between the two integrated GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M uses RDNA 3.0 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process with 512 shading units. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile uses Xe3-LPG architecture on a 3 nm Intel process with 256 shading units, which is half the shader count.

Q: How do the thermal design power (TDP) figures differ?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M has a TDP of 15 W, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has a TDP of 25 W. The Intel part consumes more power despite having fewer shading units and lower clock speeds.

Q: What is the release timeline for these products?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M was released on 2024-01-30, and the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile was released on 2026-04-15. Both are listed as Active in production status.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 760M is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, part of the Navi III IGP (Phoenix) generation. It uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, with 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 142.6M per mm². The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile uses Xe3-LPG architecture, part of the Arc Graphics-M (Wildcat Lake) generation. It uses a 3 nm process from Intel, with transistor count and die size listed as unknown.

The shading unit count is a major differentiator. The AMD part has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The Intel part has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This is exactly half the ALU, texture, and pixel pipeline resources.

Ray tracing hardware also differs. The AMD Radeon 760M includes 8 RT cores, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile includes 2 RT cores. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature levels are identical, but the underlying hardware capacity for ray tracing is substantially different.

Clock behavior shows a notable contrast. The AMD part has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2599 MHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. The AMD base clock is more than 2.6 times higher, and the boost clock is also higher, which compounds the shader count advantage.

Memory architecture is similar in concept: both use System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth. Neither has dedicated VRAM. The bus interface differs, with the AMD part using PCIe 4.0 x8 and the Intel part listed simply as IGP.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 760M wins in every measurable performance category. Its FP32 compute of 5.323 TFLOPS is more than four times the Intel part's 1,280.0 GFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s is about twice the Intel part's 20.00 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 83.17 GTexel/s is also about twice the Intel part's 40.00 GTexel/s.

The AMD part wins in shading throughput because it has 512 shading units versus 256, and it wins in clock speed, with a 2599 MHz boost versus 2500 MHz. The combination of double the shader count and a higher clock yields a large arithmetic advantage.

The AMD part also wins in ray tracing capacity with 8 RT cores versus 2 RT cores. This suggests a four-fold difference in ray tracing workload capability, though no direct ray tracing benchmark scores are recorded in the database for either part.

The Intel part does not win in any recorded performance category. Its only advantages are architectural: a newer 3 nm process node from Intel, a later release date of 2026-04-15, and a higher percentile rank of 50 versus 35. However, the percentile rank without benchmark scores is difficult to interpret, since the Intel part has no recorded average score.

The power envelope is the one area where the Intel part is not clearly worse. It has a TDP of 25 W, which is higher than the AMD part's 15 W. This means the Intel part draws more power to achieve lower performance, which is not a win in efficiency terms.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 760M | Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Xe3-LPG |

| Process Node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 3 nm (Intel) |

| Transistors | 25,390 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | unknown |

| Base Clock | 800 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2599 MHz | 2500 MHz |

| Shading Units | 512 | 256 |

| TMUs | 32 | 16 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| RT Cores | 8 | 2 |

| FP32 | 5.323 TFLOPS | 1,280.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 5.323 TFLOPS (1:1) | 2.560 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| Pixel Rate | 41.58 GPixel/s | 20.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 83.17 GTexel/s | 40.00 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 15 W | 25 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | IGP |

| Release Date | 2024-01-30 | 2026-04-15 |

The process node difference is interesting. The Intel part uses a 3 nm process, which is newer than the 4 nm process of the AMD part. However, the Intel part has fewer transistors (unknown count versus 25,390 million) and a smaller shader array. The newer node does not translate into a performance advantage in the recorded data.

The FP16 comparison shows a different ratio than FP32. The AMD part achieves 5.323 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, meaning it does not double throughput for half-precision. The Intel part achieves 2.560 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 throughput is double its FP32 rate. Even so, the AMD part still has more than double the FP16 throughput.

The TDP difference is 10 W. The AMD part operates at 15 W, and the Intel part at 25 W. This is a 66.7% higher power draw for the Intel part, relative to the AMD part's figure.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two parts. The AMD Radeon 760M has ten recorded benchmark results, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has none. This makes a direct per-test comparison impossible.

What the data does allow is a comparison of the AMD part's recorded scores against the broader GPU population. The AMD Radeon 760M has an average benchmark score of 6019 and sits at the 35th percentile versus all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon RX 6400 with an average score of 6001 and a delta of 0.3%, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M with an average score of 6000 and a delta of 0.3%, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server with an average score of 5996 and a delta of 0.4%, and the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 with an average score of 6049 and a delta of -0.5%.

These deltas are small. The AMD Radeon 760M is 0.3% ahead of the RX 6400 and GTX 770M, 0.4% ahead of the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server, and 0.5% behind the Quadro P2000. This places the integrated GPU in a competitive band with those discrete and workstation parts, all within roughly half a percent of each other.

The AMD part's strongest recorded result is Geekbench Vulkan at 30336, which is 49.8% higher than its Geekbench OpenCL score of 20255. The PassMark scores vary widely by API version: DirectX 9 scores 65, DirectX 11 scores 52, DirectX 12 scores 25, and DirectX 10 scores 19. The G3D score of 5310 is far above the GPU Compute score of 2840, indicating that the part performs better in graphics workloads than in compute workloads.

For the Intel part, the absence of benchmark scores means the data cannot confirm any performance level. Its percentile rank of 50 is nominal in the absence of an average score. The database treats it as a valid entry with an Active production status, but no measurements are recorded.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear choice for the AMD Radeon 760M. It has a recorded average benchmark score of 6019, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has no recorded scores and an average of 0. The AMD part delivers 5.323 TFLOPS FP32 versus 1,280.0 GFLOPS for the Intel part, a four-fold difference. Its pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s and texture rate of 83.17 GTexel/s are both roughly double the Intel part's 20.00 GPixel/s and 40.00 GTexel/s.

The AMD part also operates at a lower TDP of 15 W versus 25 W for the Intel part. This means it achieves higher performance with lower power draw. The only areas where the Intel part has a nominal edge are the newer 3 nm process node and the later release date, but those do not translate into any recorded performance benefit.

For systems where integrated graphics performance matters, the AMD Radeon 760M is the stronger option based on all measured data. Its nearest rivals include discrete GPUs like the RX 6400 and GTX 770M, and it sits within half a percent of those parts. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile, without any benchmark records, cannot be positioned relative to those parts.

The user should expect the AMD part to handle graphics and compute workloads with roughly double the throughput of the Intel part, at two-thirds the power draw. The Intel part's higher TDP of 25 W and lower clock speeds of 300 MHz base and 2500 MHz boost indicate a less efficient design in the recorded specifications. The AMD part's 800 MHz base clock and 2599 MHz boost clock are both higher, and its 512 shading units double the Intel part's 256.

In ray tracing, the AMD part has 8 RT cores versus 2 RT cores. In standard rasterization, the AMD part has 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs versus 16 TMUs and 8 ROPs. Every hardware resource that affects rendering throughput is larger on the AMD side.

The verdict from the database is that the AMD Radeon 760M is the superior integrated GPU in this comparison. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile may offer a newer process node and a later release date, but the recorded specifications and benchmark data all point to the AMD part as the one with measurable performance.