AMD Radeon 840M vs Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile Comparison

The AMD Radeon 840M and Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile are both integrated graphics processors designed for portable devices, yet they represent fundamentally different approaches to mobile graphics. The Radeon 840M, built on AMD's Krackan Point chip, is a 15 W IGP that prioritizes raw throughput within a constrained power envelope. The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile, based on the Wildcat Lake chip, is a 25 W part from Intel's Arc Graphics-M generation that focuses on efficiency and a newer fabrication process. The database records show both parts occupy the 50th percentile against all GPUs, but their architectural and specification differences suggest they will serve distinct user needs.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 840M is the clear winner in scenarios demanding high raw compute throughput. Its shading unit count of 256 doubles the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile's 128 shading units, and this advantage extends to texture mapping units (16 versus 8) and render output units (8 versus 4). This configuration gives the Radeon 840M a theoretical pixel rate of 23.20 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 46.40 GTexel/s, both substantially higher than the Intel part's 9.200 GPixel/s and 18.40 GTexel/s. For fill-rate-bound workloads, such as high-resolution texture mapping or pixel-heavy effects, the Radeon 840M's data indicates a decisive edge.

The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile counters with a different set of strengths. Its 3 nm process node, fabricated by Intel, is one generation ahead of the Radeon 840M's 4 nm TSMC node. This newer process likely enables better power efficiency per clock, even though the Intel part carries a higher 25 W TDP. The Intel part also features a 2:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio, delivering 1,177.6 GFLOPS of half-precision compute, which is 78.4% of its FP32 output. This contrasts with the Radeon 840M's 1:1 ratio, where FP16 and FP32 both sit at 1,484.8 GFLOPS. For workloads that utilize FP16 math, the Intel part's architecture may offer a more balanced compute profile relative to its FP32 capabilities.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon 840M uses RDNA 3.5, belonging to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile uses Xe3-LPG, part of the Arc Graphics-M generation for Wildcat Lake. These are not direct competitors in the traditional sense; AMD's part is a successor to the Navi II IGP, while Intel's part succeeds the HD Graphics-M line. The Radeon 840M carries 4 ray tracing cores, whereas the Intel part has just 1, giving AMD a theoretical advantage in ray-traced workloads, though the actual impact depends on software utilization.

Memory architecture is identical in concept: both use system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, meaning performance scales with the host system's RAM configuration. The clock speeds tell a different story. The AMD part operates at a 400 MHz base clock and boosts to 2900 MHz. The Intel part starts lower at 300 MHz and boosts to 2300 MHz. The higher boost clock on the AMD part contributes to its superior fill rates and FP32 throughput. The Intel part's lower clocks may reflect a design focused on sustained operation within its 25 W envelope, though the data does not specify power scaling behavior.

The process node difference is notable. Intel uses a 3 nm process at its own foundry, while AMD uses TSMC's 4 nm process. This node advantage for Intel could explain how a part with fewer shading units and lower clocks manages a higher TDP. The Radeon 840M's 15 W TDP suggests it is designed for more power-constrained thin-and-light devices, while the Intel part's 25 W TDP allows for more aggressive power draw, potentially sustaining higher clocks under load. Neither part supports external power connectors, as both are IGPs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows no direct head-to-head test results between these two GPUs, and neither has an average benchmark score in the database. This absence of empirical measurements makes it necessary to rely on specification-derived performance indicators. The FP32 compute figures offer the clearest comparison. The AMD Radeon 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS, which is 2.52 times the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile's 588.8 GFLOPS. This difference is larger than the shading unit ratio alone would suggest, because the AMD part also runs at a higher boost clock.

Pixel throughput follows a similar pattern. The Radeon 840M's 23.20 GPixel/s is 2.52 times the Intel part's 9.200 GPixel/s, matching the FP32 ratio exactly. Texture throughput shows the same relationship: 46.40 GTexel/s versus 18.40 GTexel/s, again a 2.52 times difference. These consistent ratios indicate that the AMD part's advantages scale uniformly across its execution resources. The Intel part's FP16 throughput of 1,177.6 GFLOPS sits between the two FP32 figures, meaning it can exceed its own FP32 rate in half-precision workloads but still falls short of the AMD part's FP32 output.

The ray tracing core count is another differentiator. AMD's 4 ray tracing cores versus Intel's 1 suggests a substantial theoretical advantage for the Radeon 840M in ray-traced scenes, though the database does not include specific ray tracing benchmarks. The Intel part's 2:1 FP16 ratio may benefit machine learning or shader workloads that rely on half-precision arithmetic, but this advantage is limited by the overall lower compute throughput. The Radeon 840M's 1:1 ratio means it does not gain extra FP16 performance, but its baseline is already much higher.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for users prioritizing raw graphics performance. The AMD Radeon 840M is the stronger part for traditional gaming or GPU compute tasks that rely on FP32, pixel fill, and texture sampling. Its 2.52 times advantage in FP32, pixel rate, and texture rate, combined with 4 ray tracing cores and a 15 W TDP, makes it the logical choice for integrated graphics where maximum throughput per watt matters. The higher boost clock of 2900 MHz versus 2300 MHz reinforces this position.

The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile is the better option for specific use cases where its architectural traits align. The 3 nm process node, fabricated by Intel, represents a more advanced manufacturing approach that may yield better efficiency at idle or in light loads, despite the higher 25 W TDP. The 2:1 FP16 ratio provides a compute profile that could be advantageous for FP16-heavy workloads, such as certain AI inference or media processing tasks, where the Intel part's 1,177.6 GFLOPS FP16 output is closer to competitive. However, the data does not quantify real-world efficiency or FP16-specific performance, so these remain qualitative observations.

Users who value maximum compatibility and raw power should select the AMD part. Users who prioritize a newer process node or require FP16 throughput closer to their FP32 baseline may find the Intel part more suitable. The lack of benchmark scores and head-to-head results in the database leaves room for uncertainty, but the specification analysis is unambiguous in its direction.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has a higher FP32 performance at 1,484.8 GFLOPS, compared to the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile's 588.8 GFLOPS.

Q: What is the difference in ray tracing core count?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has 4 ray tracing cores, while the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile has 1.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same process node?

A: No. The AMD Radeon 840M uses a 4 nm process at TSMC, and the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile uses a 3 nm process at Intel.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M boosts to 2900 MHz, while the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile boosts to 2300 MHz.

Q: How does FP16 performance compare between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS in FP16, and the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile delivers 1,177.6 GFLOPS, so AMD is higher in absolute terms.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has a 15 W TDP, and the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile has a 25 W TDP.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 840M | Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | Xe3-LPG |

| Generation | Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) | Arc Graphics-M (Wildcat Lake) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Base Clock | 400 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2900 MHz | 2300 MHz |

| Shading Units | 256 | 128 |

| TMUs | 16 | 8 |

| ROPs | 8 | 4 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 4 | 1 |

| Pixel Rate | 23.20 GPixel/s | 9.200 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 46.40 GTexel/s | 18.40 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1,484.8 GFLOPS | 588.8 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 1,484.8 GFLOPS (1:1) | 1,177.6 GFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 25 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | IGP |

| Predecessor | Navi II IGP | HD Graphics-M |

| Release Date | 2025-02-28T17:00:00.000Z | 2026-04-15T17:00:00.000Z |