AMD Radeon 8065S vs Intel Arc Graphics 32EU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon 8065S and the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU. The database lists zero benchmark entries for the AMD part, and only a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733 for the Intel part. This absence of overlapping test data makes a direct numerical comparison impossible from the available records.

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU achieves a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733, placing it in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU and the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU, both with identical average scores of 733, indicating a 0% performance delta among these three integrated graphics parts. The AMD Radeon HD 6470M scores 723, which is 1.4% behind the Arc 32EU, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M scores 751, putting it 2.4% ahead.

The absence of benchmark data for the Radeon 8065S means the database cannot confirm any performance advantage for either part. The percentile placement tells a clear story for the Intel component: the 3rd percentile rank places it among the lowest-performing GPUs in the database, while the Radeon 8065S sits at the 50th percentile, exactly in the middle of all recorded GPUs. This percentile gap suggests the AMD part occupies a fundamentally different performance tier, but without actual benchmark scores for the Radeon, the magnitude of that difference remains undetermined.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher benchmark score in the database?

A: Only the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU has a recorded benchmark score, which is 733 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The AMD Radeon 8065S has no benchmark entries in the database, so no score exists for comparison.

Q: How does the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU scores 733, identical to both the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU and Intel Arc Graphics 64EU (0% delta). It sits 1.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 6470M (723) and 2.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M (751).

Q: What is the performance percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S ranks in the 50th percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU ranks in the 3rd percentile. This indicates the AMD part sits at the median of the database, whereas the Intel part is near the bottom.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: Yes, both the AMD Radeon 8065S and the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Both also support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has 2,560 shading units, which is 10 times the 256 shading units found in the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU.

Q: Are both GPUs integrated or discrete?

A: Both are integrated graphics processors (IGP) with a slot width of IGP. Neither requires power connectors, and both use System Shared memory.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 8065S is built on the Gorgon Halo chip using the RDNA 3.5 architecture, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses the Arrow Lake-S chip with the Xe-LPG architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process, also at TSMC. Both belong to mobile integrated graphics generations: the AMD part is part of the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation, while the Intel part is from the Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) generation.

The transistor counts differ substantially. The AMD Radeon 8065S has an unknown transistor count but a die size of 308 mm². The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU has a transistor count of 17,800 million on a 243 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 73.3M per mm². The AMD die is physically larger, but without its transistor count, density calculations remain impossible.

Ray tracing support separates the two architectures. The AMD Radeon 8065S includes 40 dedicated ray tracing cores, while the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU lists no ray tracing cores in the database. Both parts lack tensor cores, and neither has a dedicated memory bus: both use System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth.

Clock behavior differs significantly between the two. The AMD Radeon 8065S has a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1950 MHz. The AMD part operates at a much higher base frequency and boosts to a substantially higher peak clock.

The compute architecture scales differently in terms of throughput. The AMD Radeon 8065S has a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 480.0 GTexel/s. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU delivers a pixel rate of 15.60 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 31.20 GTexel/s. The floating-point performance shows a similar gap: the AMD part delivers 15.36 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel part delivers 998.4 GFLOPS. For FP16, the AMD Radeon 8065S achieves 15.36 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU achieves 1.997 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification in the database. The AMD Radeon 8065S uses the Gorgon Halo chip, while the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses the Arrow Lake-S chip. The architectures are RDNA 3.5 versus Xe-LPG. The process nodes are 4 nm versus 3 nm. The die sizes are 308 mm² versus 243 mm², with the Intel part having a recorded transistor count of 17,800 million and a density of 73.3M per mm², while the AMD part records unknown values for both.

Clock speeds differ as follows: the AMD Radeon 8065S has a base clock of 1295 MHz against the Intel part's 300 MHz, and a boost clock of 3000 MHz against the Intel part's 1950 MHz. Shading units number 2,560 versus 256. Texture mapping units number 160 versus 16. Render output units number 64 versus 8. The AMD Radeon 8065S has 40 ray tracing cores, while the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU has none recorded.

The throughput figures show the AMD part at 192.0 GPixel/s and 480.0 GTexel/s, whereas the Intel part manages 15.60 GPixel/s and 31.20 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 15.36 TFLOPS versus 998.4 GFLOPS. FP16 performance is 15.36 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 1.997 TFLOPS (2:1). Thermal design power is 55 W for the AMD part and 65 W for the Intel part. The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 for the AMD part and Ring Bus for the Intel part. Display outputs are Portable Device Dependent for the AMD part and Motherboard Dependent for the Intel part.

The release dates differ: the AMD Radeon 8065S has a release date of 2025-12-31, while the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU has a release date of 2024-10-23. The AMD part lists its predecessor as Polaris Mobile, while the Intel part lists HD Graphics-M as its predecessor. Neither part has a successor listed, and neither has a launch MSRP in the database.

The Verdict

The database records show the AMD Radeon 8065S at the 50th percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU sits at the 3rd percentile. This percentile gap indicates the AMD part is positioned at the median performance level of the database, while the Intel part is among the lowest-performing entries. The AMD Radeon 8065S also has a substantially larger compute configuration: 2,560 shading units versus 256, 160 TMUs versus 16, 64 ROPs versus 8, and 40 ray tracing cores versus none.

The clock speed advantage for the AMD part is substantial, with a 3000 MHz boost clock against the Intel part's 1950 MHz. The throughput figures reinforce this: the AMD part delivers 15.36 TFLOPS of FP32 performance against the Intel part's 998.4 GFLOPS, a factor of roughly 15.4. Pixel rate and texture rate show similar gaps, with the AMD part at 192.0 GPixel/s versus 15.60 GPixel/s, and 480.0 GTexel/s versus 31.20 GTexel/s.

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU does have one advantage in the recorded data: a lower power draw of 55 W against the AMD part's 65 W, despite the AMD part having far more compute resources. The Intel part also has a smaller die at 243 mm² against 308 mm², and a smaller process node at 3 nm against 4 nm. However, these manufacturing advantages do not translate into higher recorded performance.

Users selecting between these two parts should rely on the percentile data and compute specifications. The AMD Radeon 8065S occupies the median of the database, while the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU is in the bottom 3%. The recorded benchmark score of 733 for the Intel part in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 places it alongside entry-level integrated graphics. The AMD part has no recorded benchmark scores, so its actual performance remains unmeasured, but its hardware configuration suggests a much higher capability tier.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 8065S wins on compute throughput. Its FP32 performance of 15.36 TFLOPS and FP16 performance of 15.36 TFLOPS (1:1) far exceed the Intel part's 998.4 GFLOPS and 1.997 TFLOPS (2:1). The texture rate of 480.0 GTexel/s against 31.20 GTexel/s indicates a strong advantage in texture-heavy workloads. The pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s against 15.60 GPixel/s favors the AMD part in fill-rate-bound scenarios. The presence of 40 ray tracing cores gives the AMD part a capability the Intel part lacks entirely.

The AMD Radeon 8065S also wins on clock speeds, with a 3000 MHz boost clock against the Intel part's 1950 MHz, and a 1295 MHz base clock against 300 MHz. The PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface provides a wider data path than the Intel part's Ring Bus. The AMD part also has a larger die at 308 mm², which accommodates its larger compute configuration.

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU wins on power efficiency, with a 65 W TDP against the AMD part's 55 W. It also wins on manufacturing efficiency, with a smaller 243 mm² die and a smaller 3 nm process node against the AMD part's 4 nm process. The Intel part has a recorded transistor count of 17,800 million with a density of 73.3M per mm², while the AMD part records no transistor data.

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU also wins in the database's benchmark records, as it is the only part with a score: 733 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. This score places it in the 3rd percentile, with nearest rivals including the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU and 64EU at identical scores, the AMD Radeon HD 6470M at 1.4% behind, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M at 2.4% ahead. The AMD Radeon 8065S has no benchmark entries, so it cannot claim any measured performance win in the database.

For use cases involving heavy compute, high-resolution rendering, or ray-traced workloads, the AMD Radeon 8065S has the hardware resources to deliver far higher performance, based on its 10x shading unit count and 40 ray tracing cores. For basic graphics output, lower power consumption, or systems where the integrated GPU is a secondary concern, the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU provides a functional but low-performance option, as indicated by its 3rd percentile ranking and its position among entry-level rivals in the database.