AMD Radeon 760M vs Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains a full benchmark suite for the AMD Radeon 760M, while the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has no benchmark entries in the database at this time. This asymmetry makes a direct score-for-score comparison impossible, but the AMD part's data can be interpreted against its own nearest rivals to establish a performance baseline, while the Intel part's specifications and percentile placement provide a different kind of reference.

The AMD Radeon 760M's average benchmark score is 6019. Its nearest rivals in the database are tightly clustered around that figure. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 posts an average score of 6001, which is 0.3% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M also scores 6000, again 0.3% behind. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server scores 5996, a 0.4% deficit. The only rival ahead of the 760M in this group is the NVIDIA Quadro P2000, which scores 6049, a 0.5% advantage. The spread across all four rivals is less than one percentage point, indicating the 760M sits in an extremely narrow performance band where even a small delta separates positions.

Looking at individual benchmark results for the AMD part, the strongest showing is in Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 30336. The Geekbench OpenCL result is 20255, roughly one-third lower than the Vulkan score, a pattern consistent with the API differences in how the hardware is exercised. In Passmark G3D, the 760M scores 5310, while Passmark GPU Compute reaches 2840. The older DirectX paths show lower scores: Passmark DirectX 9 scores 65, DirectX 11 scores 52, DirectX 12 scores 25, and DirectX 10 scores 19. The Passmark G2D score of 890 reflects 2D workload performance. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the score is 400.

The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has an average benchmark score of 0 because no benchmark records exist in the database. Its percentile vs all GPUs is 50, which places it at the median of the database's GPU distribution, while the AMD Radeon 760M sits at the 35th percentile. The percentile gap is 15 points in Intel's favor, but the absence of actual benchmark scores for the Intel part means this percentile cannot be cross-checked against measured performance. The AMD part's percentile is supported by its full benchmark suite; the Intel part's percentile is not.

The head-to-head benchmark table in the database is empty, and both wins counters are zero. Consequently, there is no single test where one part beats the other by a recorded margin. The only numerical performance comparison available is between the AMD part and its own rivals, all of which fall within a 0.5% band. The AMD Radeon 760M is effectively tied with the RX 6400 and GTX 770M, marginally behind the Quadro P2000, and marginally ahead of the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server configuration listed.

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 760M compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The 760M's average benchmark score is 6019. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is 0.3% behind at 6001, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M is 0.3% behind at 6000, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server is 0.4% behind at 5996, and the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 is 0.5% ahead at 6049.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile have any benchmark scores?

A: No. The database contains an empty benchmark array for the Intel part, and its average benchmark score is recorded as 0. The AMD Radeon 760M has ten benchmark entries across Geekbench, Passmark, and 3DMark tests.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each part?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M is at the 35th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is at the 50th percentile. The Intel part's percentile is not supported by measured scores, since its benchmark array is empty.

Q: Which part has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M has a boost clock of 2599 MHz. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has a boost clock of 2300 MHz. The AMD part's boost is 299 MHz higher.

Q: What is the FP32 throughput for each part?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M delivers 5.323 TFLOPS FP32. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile delivers 2.355 TFLOPS FP32. The AMD part's FP32 throughput is more than double the Intel part's.

Q: Which part has more ray tracing cores?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M has 8 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has 4 ray tracing cores. The AMD part has twice the ray tracing core count.

The Verdict

The data supports different conclusions depending on whether measured results or specifications are prioritized. For a buyer or system designer requiring verified benchmark scores, the AMD Radeon 760M is the only option with recorded measurements. Its average score of 6019 places it within 0.5% of four rivals, which means it performs essentially at parity with the discrete GPUs in its nearest-rival cluster. The 35th percentile ranking is a concrete anchor point.

The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile cannot be evaluated on measured performance, because the database contains no scores for it. Its 50th percentile ranking suggests the database places it above the AMD part in the overall distribution, but this is an unverified placement. A rational choice based strictly on available data would favor the AMD part, since its performance is documented and its rival deltas are negligible.

For scenarios where compute throughput matters, the AMD part's 5.323 TFLOPS FP32 is more than double the Intel part's 2.355 TFLOPS. The AMD part also has 8 ray tracing cores versus 4 on the Intel part. These are structural advantages, not benchmark results, but they are recorded facts. The Intel part does have a higher FP16 rate at 4.710 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, versus the AMD part's 5.323 TFLOPS at 1:1, which indicates the Intel part is designed for a different FP16 workflow.

The TDP figures differ: the AMD part is rated at 15 W and the Intel part at 25 W. The AMD part uses a 4 nm TSMC process, while the Intel part uses a 3 nm Intel process. The Intel part is specified as IGP bus interface, and the AMD part uses PCIe 4.0 x8. These differences suggest the AMD part is positioned for lower power envelopes, while the Intel part consumes more power for its unmeasured performance.

The verdict from the recorded data is straightforward: the AMD Radeon 760M is a measured, benchmarked part with a clear performance baseline. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is a part with specifications but no benchmark evidence. Until the Intel part accrues scores, the AMD part is the defensible selection in any comparison that relies on database measurements.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in several recorded specification fields. The AMD Radeon 760M uses the Phoenix chip, while the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses the Panther Lake chip. The AMD architecture is RDNA 3.0, and the Intel architecture is Xe3-LPG. The process nodes differ: AMD uses 4 nm from TSMC, Intel uses 3 nm from Intel. Transistor count and die size are recorded for the AMD part (25,390 million transistors, 178 mm² die size) but listed as unknown for the Intel part.

Base clocks differ substantially. The AMD part has an 800 MHz base clock; the Intel part has a 300 MHz base clock. Boost clocks are 2599 MHz for AMD and 2300 MHz for Intel. FP32 throughput is 5.323 TFLOPS for AMD and 2.355 TFLOPS for Intel. FP16 throughput is 5.323 TFLOPS (1:1) for AMD and 4.710 TFLOPS (2:1) for Intel. Pixel rate is 41.58 GPixel/s for AMD and 36.80 GPixel/s for Intel. Texture rate is 83.17 GTexel/s for AMD and 73.60 GTexel/s for Intel.

The ray tracing core count differs: AMD has 8, Intel has 4. The TDP differs: AMD is 15 W, Intel is 25 W. The bus interface differs: AMD uses PCIe 4.0 x8, Intel uses IGP. Display outputs differ: AMD is motherboard dependent, Intel is portable device dependent. The release dates differ: AMD released on 2024-01-30, Intel on 2026-01-26. The AMD part has a predecessor recorded as Navi II IGP; the Intel part has no predecessor listed.

Shared specifications include shading units (512 each), texture mapping units (32 each), render output units (16 each), memory configuration (system shared for size, type, and bus width), bandwidth (system dependent for both), slot width (IGP for both), power connectors (none for both), DirectX support (12 Ultimate 12_2 for both), OpenGL (4.6 for both), and Vulkan (1.4 for both). Neither part has a launch MSRP recorded.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 760M is built on RDNA 3.0 and belongs to the Navi III IGP (Phoenix) generation. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is built on Xe3-LPG and belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation. The AMD part is manufactured on a 4 nm TSMC process, with 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 142.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel part is on a 3 nm Intel process, but its transistor count and die size are unknown.

The compute architecture differs in FP16 handling. The AMD part executes FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning both formats run at 5.323 TFLOPS. The Intel part runs FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, delivering 4.710 TFLOPS FP16 against 2.355 TFLOPS FP32. This indicates the Intel architecture dedicates additional hardware to FP16 operations, while the AMD architecture treats FP16 and FP32 with equal throughput.

Ray tracing hardware differs in count: 8 ray tracing cores on the AMD part versus 4 on the Intel part. The functional implications are not benchmarked, but the recorded core counts establish a structural difference in ray tracing capability. The AMD part also has a higher pixel rate (41.58 GPixel/s vs 36.80 GPixel/s) and texture rate (83.17 GTexel/s vs 73.60 GTexel/s), consistent with its higher clock speeds.

The power characteristics differ meaningfully. The AMD part operates within a 15 W TDP, while the Intel part is rated at 25 W. Both are integrated graphics processors with no power connectors and no slot width beyond IGP. The AMD part connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Intel part's bus interface is simply IGP, reflecting its integration into a mobile processor package. Display output responsibilities are assigned differently: the AMD part depends on the motherboard, the Intel part depends on the portable device.

The release timeline places the AMD part in the database with a 2024 launch and the Intel part with a 2026 launch. The AMD part has a predecessor (Navi II IGP) and no successor; the Intel part has neither. Both parts report the same API support levels: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The architectural differences that matter most are the process node, the FP16 execution ratio, the ray tracing core count, the TDP, and the clock structure, all of which are recorded in the database.