AMD Radeon 8065S vs Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile Comparison

AMD Radeon 8065S and Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile represent two distinct approaches to integrated graphics in modern mobile processors. The AMD part is built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture using a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel solution uses the Xe-LPG architecture on Intel's 10 nm process. The recorded data shows a substantial gap in raw compute resources, with the AMD component carrying 2560 shading units compared to 896 on the Intel side. This difference alone sets the stage for a wide performance separation, but the specifics of each part's design and configuration matter just as much as the core counts.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 8065S wins in every directly comparable compute metric recorded in the database. Its FP32 throughput is 15.36 TFLOPS, which is roughly 3.9 times the 3.942 TFLOPS delivered by the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile. The pixel fill rate of the AMD part is 192.0 GPixel/s versus 52.80 GPixel/s for Intel, a lead of about 3.6 times. Texture fill rate shows a similar story: 480.0 GTexel/s for AMD compared to 123.2 GTexel/s for Intel, a factor of roughly 3.9. In terms of raw workload capacity, the AMD part is in a different class.

The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile does hold one mathematical advantage, and it is in the FP16 calculation. Intel's part delivers 7.885 TFLOPS of FP16 performance, which is double its FP32 figure, indicating a 2:1 ratio. The AMD Radeon 8065S provides 15.36 TFLOPS of FP16, which is identical to its FP32 figure, meaning a 1:1 ratio. So while Intel has a higher FP16 to FP32 ratio, the absolute FP16 throughput of the AMD part is still nearly twice that of the Intel chip. The database shows no scenario where the Intel GPU wins in absolute performance, but its efficiency in half-precision math is a distinct architectural trait.

The thermal design power figures differ as well. The AMD Radeon 8065S is rated at 55 W, while the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile is rated at 65 W. Despite drawing a higher TDP, the Intel part delivers far lower absolute performance. The AMD part achieves higher throughput in every measured category while consuming less power according to the TDP ratings. That combination of results indicates that the AMD solution has a significant performance per watt advantage, although the database does not include direct efficiency measurements.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Radeon 8065S is the stronger GPU for any workload that depends on traditional rasterization or general compute. Its FP32 output of 15.36 TFLOPS is more than sufficient for demanding gaming or content creation tasks, and its 40 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced effects that the Intel part lacks entirely, as the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has no listed RT cores. The AMD part also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, while the Intel GPU is limited to DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1. For users running modern DirectX 12 Ultimate titles, the AMD part is the only one of the two that meets the full specification.

The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile is a more modest solution. Its 896 shading units and 3.942 TFLOPS of FP32 performance place it in a lower performance tier. The database shows its 7.885 TFLOPS FP16 output, which is double its FP32, suggesting that it may handle certain compute workloads that leverage half-precision more efficiently on a relative basis. However, the absolute numbers are low compared to the AMD part. The Intel GPU is released on 2023-12-14, while the AMD part is a newer release from 2025-12-31. The production status for both is listed as Active.

For any user who prioritizes graphics performance, the AMD Radeon 8065S is the clear choice based on the recorded specifications. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile is suitable for basic graphics tasks or light gaming where the higher TDP is acceptable and the lower performance is sufficient. The data does not support any scenario where the Intel part outperforms the AMD part in the metrics tracked by the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not list any direct head-to-head benchmark results for these two GPUs, so the comparison relies entirely on the specification-derived performance numbers. The most decisive figure is FP32 throughput, where the AMD Radeon 8065S delivers 15.36 TFLOPS against 3.942 TFLOPS from the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile. That is a lead of 11.418 TFLOPS, which translates to roughly 3.9 times the single-precision compute capability. This metric directly affects shader-heavy workloads and most modern games, where FP32 operations dominate.

Pixel fill rate is another critical metric for resolution scaling. The AMD part reaches 192.0 GPixel/s, while the Intel GPU is limited to 52.80 GPixel/s. This gap means the AMD Radeon 8065S can fill the screen with rendered pixels more than three and a half times faster, which directly impacts performance at higher resolutions or with heavy overdraw. Texture fill rate follows a similar pattern: 480.0 GTexel/s for AMD versus 123.2 GTexel/s for Intel. Texturing is essential for detailed surfaces, and the AMD part holds a 3.9 times advantage here.

The FP16 comparison is more nuanced. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has a 2:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio, giving it 7.885 TFLOPS of half-precision throughput. The AMD Radeon 8065S has a 1:1 ratio, so its FP16 output is identical to its FP32 at 15.36 TFLOPS. Even with Intel's ratio advantage, the AMD part still delivers roughly 1.95 times the absolute FP16 performance. For workloads that specifically benefit from FP16, such as certain AI inference tasks, the AMD part has the higher ceiling.

Clock speeds also differ significantly. The AMD Radeon 8065S has a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The AMD part's higher boost clock, combined with its larger shader array, explains much of the performance gap. The AMD part also uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the Intel GPU connects via a Ring Bus, which ties it to the CPU's internal fabric rather than a dedicated PCIe link.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has 2560 shading units, while the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has 896 shading units.

Q: What is the FP32 performance difference?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S delivers 15.36 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is approximately 3.9 times the 3.942 TFLOPS offered by the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile.

Q: Does the Intel GPU support ray tracing?

A: No, the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has no listed RT cores. The AMD Radeon 8065S includes 40 RT cores for ray-traced workloads.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S is rated at 55 W, and the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile is rated at 65 W.

Q: Which GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), which is a lower feature level.

Q: What is the process node for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses a 10 nm process at Intel.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 8065S is based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, which is a direct evolution of AMD's graphics designs. It uses the Gorgon Halo chip and belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation. The architecture includes 40 RT cores, which are dedicated hardware units for ray tracing acceleration. The AMD part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, the highest currently available, and it also supports OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The process node is 4 nm at TSMC, and the die size is 308 mm².

The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses the Xe-LPG architecture, which is part of the Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) generation. The chip is Meteor Lake, and it does not list any RT cores in the database. The Intel GPU supports DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1, which is one step below the Ultimate feature set. It also supports OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, matching the AMD part on those API versions. The process node is 10 nm at Intel, which is larger than the AMD part's 4 nm process.

The FP16 implementation differs between the two architectures. The AMD Radeon 8065S has a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio, meaning it processes half-precision at the same rate as single-precision. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has a 2:1 ratio, meaning it can process half-precision at twice the rate of single-precision. This architectural choice reflects different design priorities: AMD appears to focus on consistent compute throughput, while Intel emphasizes half-precision throughput for specific workloads.

The bus interface also differs. The AMD part uses PCIe 5.0 x16, which provides a high-bandwidth connection to the host processor. The Intel part uses a Ring Bus, which is an internal interconnect used in Meteor Lake processors. This difference affects how each GPU accesses system memory, although both share system memory for graphics operations.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights the key specification differences between the two GPUs, using only the fields where the two parts differ.

| Specification | AMD Radeon 8065S | Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | Xe-LPG |

| Chip | Gorgon Halo | Meteor Lake |

| Generation | Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) | Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 308 mm² | Not listed |

| Base Clock | 1295 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3000 MHz | 2200 MHz |

| Shading Units | 2560 | 896 |

| TMUs | 160 | 56 |

| ROPs | 64 | 24 |

| RT Cores | 40 | Not listed |

| Pixel Rate | 192.0 GPixel/s | 52.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 480.0 GTexel/s | 123.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 15.36 TFLOPS | 3.942 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 15.36 TFLOPS (1:1) | 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 55 W | 65 W |

| Power Connectors | None | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | Ring Bus |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Release Date | 2025-12-31 | 2023-12-13 |

| Predecessor | Polaris Mobile | HD Graphics-M |

The AMD Radeon 8065S has a larger die at 308 mm², while the Intel part does not list a die size. The AMD part uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, which is more advanced than Intel's 10 nm process. The clock speeds are notably higher on the AMD side, with a 3000 MHz boost clock versus 2200 MHz on Intel. The AMD part also has a significantly higher pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 throughput, all of which point to its superior performance in traditional graphics workloads. The Intel part has a higher TDP at 65 W, yet it delivers less than a third of the FP32 performance, indicating a less efficient design. The release dates show that the AMD part is a newer product, launched at the end of 2025, while the Intel part came out in late 2023.