AMD Radeon 820M vs Intel Arc G3 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data for the AMD Radeon 820M and Intel Arc G3 presents a clear split based on workload characteristics. The AMD Radeon 820M, built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture with a 4 nm process, operates with a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2800 MHz. Its compute configuration includes 128 shading units, 8 texture mapping units, 4 render output units, and 2 ray tracing cores. This arrangement delivers a pixel rate of 11.20 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 22.40 GTexel/s. The floating-point throughput stands at 716.8 GFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, indicating a 1:1 ratio. The thermal design power is 15 W.

The Intel Arc G3, conversely, uses the Xe3-LPG architecture on a 3 nm process from Intel's own foundry. Its clocks are lower at a base of 300 MHz and a boost of 2400 MHz, but the execution unit count is substantially higher. The Arc G3 packs 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs, and 10 ray tracing cores. This results in a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput reaches 6.144 TFLOPS, while FP16 doubles to 12.29 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The thermal design power is 25 W.

The data indicates the Intel Arc G3 wins decisively in raw throughput, pixel fill, and texture processing. The Radeon 820M wins in clock speed, operating at a higher boost frequency, and in power efficiency, with a lower TDP. For workloads that depend on raw shader count and fill rates, the Arc G3 dominates. For tasks sensitive to clock frequency and power constraints, the Radeon 820M holds an advantage. The benchmark results show no recorded wins for either part in the head-to-head comparisons, as the database contains zero entries for both winsA and winsB. This absence of benchmark data means the performance split is derived entirely from the architectural specifications and throughput figures.

FAQ

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare between the AMD Radeon 820M and Intel Arc G3?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M contains 128 shading units, while the Intel Arc G3 contains 1280 shading units, a tenfold increase. This difference directly impacts the FP32 throughput, where the Arc G3 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS compared to the Radeon's 716.8 GFLOPS.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock speeds?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M has a boost clock of 2800 MHz, which is higher than the Intel Arc G3's 2400 MHz. Despite the lower clock, the Arc G3 achieves higher throughput due to its larger execution unit count.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Intel Arc G3 has a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s, which is significantly higher than the AMD Radeon 820M's 11.20 GPixel/s. The Arc G3 also leads in texture rate at 96.00 GTexel/s versus 22.40 GTexel/s.

Q: How does ray tracing performance differ?

A: The Intel Arc G3 includes 10 ray tracing cores, while the AMD Radeon 820M includes 2. This suggests the Arc G3 has a substantially larger ray tracing capability, though no benchmark scores are recorded to quantify the real-world impact.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M has a TDP of 15 W, while the Intel Arc G3 has a TDP of 25 W. The Radeon 820M is more power-efficient on paper, but the Arc G3 offers higher performance per watt in raw throughput.

Q: Which architecture and process node does each GPU use?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC. The Intel Arc G3 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture on a 3 nm process from Intel. Both are integrated graphics processors with system-shared memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no benchmark entries for the head-to-head comparison between the AMD Radeon 820M and Intel Arc G3. The fields for headToHeadBenchmarks, winsA, and winsB are all empty or zero. This means there are no measured scores to walk through, no specific frame rates, and no percentile deltas to cite. The analysis must rely on the specification sheets and throughput calculations.

The largest win for the Intel Arc G3 appears in the FP32 throughput category. The Arc G3 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS, which is 8.57 times the 716.8 GFLOPS of the Radeon 820M. This ratio comes directly from the recorded numbers: 6.144 TFLOPS divided by 0.7168 TFLOPS equals approximately 8.57. The texture rate shows a similar gap, with the Arc G3 achieving 96.00 GTexel/s versus 22.40 GTexel/s, a 4.29x advantage. The pixel rate gap is 48.00 GPixel/s versus 11.20 GPixel/s, a 4.29x advantage as well.

The AMD Radeon 820M wins in clock speed. Its boost clock of 2800 MHz is 400 MHz higher than the Arc G3's 2400 MHz, a 16.7% advantage. The Radeon also has a higher base clock at 400 MHz versus 300 MHz. In power efficiency, the Radeon's 15 W TDP is 40% lower than the Arc G3's 25 W TDP. The FP16 performance presents an interesting divergence: the Radeon 820M's FP16 matches its FP32 at 716.8 GFLOPS, while the Arc G3 doubles its FP32 to 12.29 TFLOPS. This 2:1 ratio on the Arc G3 versus the 1:1 ratio on the Radeon means the Arc G3's FP16 advantage is even larger at 17.14x.

The absence of benchmark scores means the percentile vs all GPUs is recorded as 50 for both, with an average benchmark score of 0 for each. The nearest rivals list is empty for both parts. The data confirms that the Arc G3 is designed for higher compute throughput, while the Radeon 820M prioritizes lower power draw and higher clocks.

Specification Differences

The two integrated GPUs differ across nearly every compute parameter. The shading units: 128 for the Radeon 820M, 1280 for the Arc G3. The TMUs: 8 versus 40. The ROPs: 4 versus 20. The ray tracing cores: 2 versus 10. The pixel rate: 11.20 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s. The texture rate: 22.40 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s. The FP32: 716.8 GFLOPS versus 6.144 TFLOPS. The FP16: 716.8 GFLOPS versus 12.29 TFLOPS.

Clock speeds differ in the opposite direction. The Radeon 820M runs at a 400 MHz base and 2800 MHz boost, while the Arc G3 runs at a 300 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost. The TDP also differs: 15 W for the Radeon, 25 W for the Arc G3. The process node differs: 4 nm for the Radeon from TSMC, 3 nm for the Arc G3 from Intel. The bus interface differs: the Radeon 820M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Arc G3 uses an unspecified IGP interface.

The memory subsystems are identical in description: both use system-shared memory with system-shared type and bus width, and both have system-dependent bandwidth. Neither has a dedicated memory size. The display outputs are both listed as portable device dependent. The power connectors are none for both, and both are IGP slot width. The API support is identical: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 for both.

The release dates differ, with the Radeon 820M released on 2025-02-28 and the Arc G3 on 2026-05-31. The Radeon has a predecessor listed as Navi II IGP, while the Arc G3 has no predecessor. Neither has a successor. Both have a null launch MSRP. The production status is active for both.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 820M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture, belonging to the Navi III IGP generation with the chip codename Krackan Point 2. The Intel Arc G3 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture, belonging to the Arc Graphics-M generation with the chip codename Panther Lake. These are fundamentally different design philosophies. RDNA 3.5 is AMD's iterative graphics architecture, optimized for power efficiency in mobile integrated graphics. Xe3-LPG is Intel's low-power graphics architecture, designed to scale up execution units for higher throughput within a mobile power envelope.

The process nodes differ: the Radeon 820M uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Arc G3 uses a 3 nm process from Intel's own foundry. The smaller node on the Arc G3 allows for a higher transistor density, though the exact transistor counts are unknown for both. The die sizes are also unknown for both.

The shading unit organization reflects the architectural split. The Radeon 820M has 128 shading units arranged in a compact configuration with 8 TMUs and 4 ROPs, which is typical for a low-power IGP. The Arc G3 has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, indicating a much wider execution layout. The ray tracing cores follow the same pattern: 2 on the Radeon versus 10 on the Arc G3.

The FP16 behavior reveals an architectural difference. The Radeon 820M executes FP16 at the same rate as FP32, a 1:1 ratio, which means it does not gain a throughput advantage from half-precision operations. The Arc G3 executes FP16 at twice the FP32 rate, a 2:1 ratio, indicating dedicated hardware for accelerated half-precision math. This makes the Arc G3 more suited to workloads that leverage FP16, such as certain AI inference tasks or graphics effects.

The clock behavior also differs. The Radeon 820M has a higher base and boost clock, suggesting a design that relies on frequency to extract performance from a smaller execution unit count. The Arc G3 runs at lower clocks but compensates with a much larger execution unit count. The TDP difference of 15 W versus 25 W reflects the larger silicon and higher throughput of the Arc G3.

The bus interface differs as well: the Radeon 820M connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Arc G3 lists an IGP interface without further detail. Both are integrated graphics with system-shared memory, so the memory bandwidth is system-dependent for both.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Arc G3 delivers substantially higher raw compute across every measured throughput metric. Its FP32 output of 6.144 TFLOPS far exceeds the Radeon 820M's 716.8 GFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s dwarf the Radeon's 11.20 and 22.40, respectively. For any workload that stresses shader execution, fill rate, or ray tracing, the Arc G3 is the stronger part.

The AMD Radeon 820M holds advantages in clock speed and power draw. Its boost clock of 2800 MHz is higher than the Arc G3's 2400 MHz, and its 15 W TDP is lower than the 25 W TDP of the Arc G3. For systems with tight power budgets or thermal constraints, the Radeon 820M presents a more efficient option. Its smaller shading unit count of 128 still delivers a usable 716.8 GFLOPS, and the 1:1 FP16 ratio indicates a simpler execution pipeline.

The release timeline also differs: the Radeon 820M launched on 2025-02-28, while the Arc G3 launched on 2026-05-31. The Radeon has a predecessor in Navi II IGP, while the Arc G3 does not. Both are active production parts with null launch MSRP.

The absence of benchmark scores means the percentile ranking for both is recorded at 50, indicating an average position in the overall GPU distribution, though this is based on no actual measured data. The nearest rivals lists are empty, so there are no direct comparison scores to reference.

For users prioritizing maximum performance in integrated graphics, the Arc G3 is the clear choice based on the recorded specifications. Its 10x shading unit advantage and 8.57x FP32 advantage are decisive. For users prioritizing power efficiency and higher clock speeds, the Radeon 820M offers a lower TDP and faster boost clock. The choice depends on whether the workload is throughput-bound or power-bound. The data shows the Arc G3 as the higher-performing part, while the Radeon 820M serves the efficiency segment.