AMD Radeon 8065S vs Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the AMD Radeon 8065S and the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile shows no direct benchmark scores in the database. Neither part has reported average benchmark scores, and the head-to-head benchmark table is empty. Both GPUs sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of zero for each. This means no measured performance delta can be cited for either part.

The absence of scores does not leave the comparison without substance. The specification-level data provides a basis for expected performance differences. The AMD Radeon 8065S delivers a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile delivers 14.40 GPixel/s. The AMD part is 13.33 times faster in pixel throughput based on these figures. Texture rate follows a similar pattern: the Radeon 8065S reaches 480.0 GTexel/s, while the Intel part reaches 43.20 GTexel/s, a ratio of 11.11 to 1.

Compute throughput shows a narrower but still substantial gap. The AMD Radeon 8065S provides 15.36 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile provides 1,382.4 GFLOPS, which converts to 1.3824 TFLOPS. The AMD part is 11.11 times higher in FP32 throughput. FP16 performance reverses the ratio structure: the AMD part offers 15.36 TFLOPS with a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio, while the Intel part offers 2.765 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. In raw FP16, AMD leads by a factor of 5.56.

Clock speeds favor AMD as well. The Radeon 8065S runs at a 1295 MHz base clock and a 3000 MHz boost clock. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile runs at a 300 MHz base clock and an 1800 MHz boost clock. The boost clock difference is 1.67 times in favor of AMD. The base clock difference is 4.32 times in favor of AMD.

Neither part has a launch MSRP listed in the database, so no pricing statement can be made. Both are integrated graphics products, with the slot width listed as IGP for each. The AMD part uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus interface.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers, foundries, and process nodes. The AMD Radeon 8065S uses the Gorgon Halo chip built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 4 nm process. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile uses the Meteor Lake chip built on the Xe-LPG architecture, fabricated by Intel on a 10 nm process. The die size for the AMD part is 308 mm²; the die size for the Intel part is not recorded. Transistor counts are either unknown or not recorded for both parts.

The AMD part belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation, while the Intel part belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) generation. AMD lists Polaris Mobile as the predecessor for the Radeon 8065S. Intel lists HD Graphics-M as the predecessor for the Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile. Both parts are marked as Active in production status.

Shader resources differ sharply. The Radeon 8065S has 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. The AMD part carries 40 ray tracing cores; the Intel part lists no ray tracing cores in the database. Neither part records tensor cores.

Memory architecture is identical in form: both use System Shared memory, with System Shared type, System Shared bus width, and System Dependent bandwidth. Neither GPU has dedicated VRAM, so memory performance depends entirely on the host system.

API support differs in DirectX and Vulkan versions. The AMD Radeon 8065S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Power characteristics differ. The AMD part has a TDP of 55 W and lists no power connectors, with power connectors marked as None. The Intel part has a TDP of 28 W, with power connectors not recorded. Both are IGP slot width devices. Display outputs for both are listed as Portable Device Dependent.

Release dates differ by two years. The AMD Radeon 8065S has a release date of 2025-12-31, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has a release date of 2023-12-13. The AMD part is newer by a substantial margin.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Radeon 8065S is the stronger part on every recorded specification that affects graphics throughput. Its FP32 compute of 15.36 TFLOPS is 11.11 times higher than the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile. Its pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s is 13.33 times higher. Its texture rate of 480.0 GTexel/s is 11.11 times higher. Its boost clock of 3000 MHz is 1.67 times higher than the Intel part's 1800 MHz boost.

The AMD part also carries 40 ray tracing cores, while the Intel part lists none. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), a difference that affects feature-level support for modern graphics APIs.

The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile is not without its own advantages. Its TDP of 28 W is less than half of the AMD part's 55 W. For thermally constrained portable devices, that lower power draw can be decisive. Its FP16 throughput of 2.765 TFLOPS, while lower than the AMD part's 15.36 TFLOPS, uses a 2:1 ratio that may be more efficient for workloads that tolerate reduced precision.

The data does not record any benchmark wins for either part, as both have empty benchmark tables. The verdict must rest on specification-level analysis. The Radeon 8065S is positioned as a higher-performance integrated GPU with a larger die, more shader resources, and a more recent process node. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile is positioned as a lower-power integrated GPU with a smaller shader count and an older process node.

For users who need maximum integrated graphics throughput, the AMD part is the clear choice from the recorded specs. For users who prioritize lower power consumption in a portable device, the Intel part has the advantage in the recorded power figures.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S delivers 15.36 TFLOPS of FP32, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile delivers 1,382.4 GFLOPS. The AMD part is 11.11 times higher.

Q: What are the TDP values for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has a TDP of 55 W, and the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has a TDP of 28 W.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has 2560 shading units, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has 384 shading units.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The AMD Radeon 8065S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: Which GPU has ray tracing cores?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has 40 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile lists no ray tracing cores in the database.

Q: What process nodes are used by each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S is built on a 4 nm process by TSMC. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile is built on a 10 nm process by Intel.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 8065S wins on raw graphics throughput. Its 15.36 TFLOPS FP32, 480.0 GTexel/s texture rate, and 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate place it far ahead of the Intel part in compute-heavy and fill-rate-bound workloads. The 40 ray tracing cores give it hardware support for ray-traced effects, which the Intel part lacks entirely. The DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support means it can handle the highest feature level available in the recorded API data, while the Intel part is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). The PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface provides a high-bandwidth connection to the host system, though the Intel part's Ring Bus interface is not directly comparable in the recorded data.

The AMD part's 3000 MHz boost clock is the highest recorded boost among the two parts. Its 1295 MHz base clock is 4.32 times higher than the Intel part's 300 MHz base clock. The larger die size of 308 mm², combined with the 4 nm process node, suggests a design oriented toward sustained performance rather than minimal power draw.

The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile wins on power efficiency and integration simplicity. Its 28 W TDP is 27 W lower than the AMD part's 55 W TDP, a 49.09 percent reduction. For thin-and-light portable devices where thermal headroom is scarce, the lower power envelope is a meaningful advantage. The Intel part's 384 shading units and 24 texture mapping units, while far smaller than the AMD part's resources, are sufficient for lighter graphics workloads at lower power.

The Intel part's FP16 output of 2.765 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio means it processes two FP16 operations per FP32 operation, which can be advantageous for certain machine learning or media workloads that use reduced precision. The AMD part's FP16 output matches its FP32 output at 15.36 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, which is higher in absolute terms but does not offer the same relative throughput boost for FP16-heavy tasks.

The AMD Radeon 8065S is the newer product, released in 2025-12-31, versus the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile's 2023-12-13 release date. The AMD part is also an Active production product, as is the Intel part. Neither part has any recorded benchmark scores, so the use-case split is based entirely on the specification data.

For high-resolution rendering, complex shading, or ray-traced workloads, the AMD Radeon 8065S has the recorded hardware resources to deliver substantially higher throughput. For low-power portable devices with modest graphics demands, the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile offers a much smaller power footprint. Both parts share System Shared memory and System Dependent bandwidth, so their effective performance will scale with host memory configuration in both cases.