AMD Radeon 890M vs Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a stark contrast between these two integrated GPUs, though direct head-to-head benchmark results are absent from the database. The AMD Radeon 890M carries a full suite of ten benchmark scores, while the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile has no recorded benchmark results at all. This absence itself is informative: the Intel part's average benchmark score sits at 0 in the database, placing it in the 50th percentile among all GPUs, but this percentile is based on no measured data.

The AMD Radeon 890M delivers an average benchmark score of 9210, which places it in the 45th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals, according to the database, are the AMD Radeon Vega 8 with an average score of 9221 (a delta of -0.1%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 at 9273 (-0.7%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 at 9294 (-0.9%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M at 9302 (-1.0%). These deltas are remarkably small, indicating that the 890M sits in a tightly packed performance band where fractions of a percent separate it from its immediate competition.

Looking at the individual benchmark results for the AMD Radeon 890M, the strongest showing comes in Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 40808, followed by Geekbench OpenCL at 37254. The PassMark suite shows a different picture: G3D scores 8076, GPU Compute scores 4157, G2D scores 979, DirectX 9 scores 97, DirectX 11 scores 73, DirectX 12 scores 37, and DirectX 10 scores 33. The disparity between the Geekbench compute-oriented tests and the PassMark gaming-oriented tests suggests that the 890M's architecture favors raw compute workloads over legacy API gaming scenarios.

Since the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile has no benchmark scores in the database, no direct numerical comparison can be made. The only quantifiable comparison available is the transistor density: the AMD part packs 145.9 million transistors per square millimeter, while the Intel part's density is not recorded. The AMD 890M also shows a theoretical FP32 throughput of 5.939 TFLOPS against the Intel part's 588.8 GFLOPS, a difference of roughly tenfold, though these are specification-derived figures rather than measured benchmark outcomes.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Radeon 890M has an average benchmark score of 9210. The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile has an average benchmark score of 0, with no benchmark entries recorded in the database.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 890M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 890M trails the AMD Radeon Vega 8 by 0.1%, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 by 0.7%, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 by 0.9%, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M by 1.0%. All four rivals sit within one percentage point of the 890M's average score.

Q: What are the clock speed ranges for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 890M runs at a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile runs at a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2300 MHz.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 according to the database.

Q: What is the power draw difference between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon 890M has a TDP of 15 W, while the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile has a TDP of 25 W. The Intel part draws 10 W more under its rated power envelope.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon 890M has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operations units. The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile has 128 shading units, 8 texture mapping units, and 4 raster operations units.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 890M wins in every category where the database contains measurable data. Its shading unit count of 1024 is eight times higher than the Intel part's 128. The texture mapping unit count of 64 is likewise eight times higher than Intel's 8. The raster operations pipeline shows a similar ratio: 32 ROPS against Intel's 4. The ray tracing core count of 16 versus 1 favors AMD by a factor of sixteen.

The compute throughput metrics follow the same pattern. The AMD 890M produces a pixel rate of 92.80 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 185.6 GTexel/s, compared to the Intel part's 9.200 GPixel/s and 18.40 GTexel/s. The FP32 figure of 5.939 TFLOPS for AMD dwarfs the Intel part's 588.8 GFLOPS. The FP16 calculation shows AMD at 5.939 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while Intel achieves 1,177.6 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, meaning Intel's FP16 throughput is double its FP32 throughput, a typical pattern for consumer graphics architectures.

The process technology comparison favors Intel on paper: the Intel part uses a 3 nm node from Intel's foundry, while the AMD part uses a 4 nm node from TSMC. The Intel chip, codenamed Wildcat Lake, is built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, while the AMD chip, codenamed Strix Point, uses RDNA 3.5. The AMD die measures 233 mm² and contains 34,000 million transistors, while the Intel die size and transistor count are listed as unknown.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The AMD Radeon 890M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile uses an IGP bus interface with no separate bus width specified. Both are integrated graphics processors with no power connectors and no suggested PSU requirement.

Clock speeds differ substantially. AMD's base clock of 400 MHz is higher than Intel's 300 MHz, and AMD's boost clock of 2900 MHz exceeds Intel's 2300 MHz by 600 MHz. Both use system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, so no dedicated memory size, type, or bus width figures apply to either.

The shading pipeline shows an eightfold difference in every stage. AMD fields 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPS, and 16 ray tracing cores. Intel fields 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, 4 ROPS, and 1 ray tracing core. Neither GPU has tensor cores listed in the database.

The production status for both is Active. The AMD part released on 2024-07-14, while the Intel part carries a release date of 2026-04-15. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database. The AMD part's predecessor is listed as Navi II IGP, while the Intel part's predecessor is HD Graphics-M. Both are IGP slot width devices with portable device dependent display outputs.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 890M is built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture and belongs to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point mobile. It uses a 4 nm TSMC process with a die size of 233 mm² and 34,000 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 145.9 million per square millimeter. The chip is identified as Strix Point.

The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile uses the Xe3-LPG architecture and belongs to the Arc Graphics-M generation for Wildcat Lake. It uses a 3 nm Intel process, but the transistor count and die size are both listed as unknown in the database. The chip is identified as Wildcat Lake.

The FP16 compute ratio differs between the two architectures. The AMD part executes FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 5.939 TFLOPS. The Intel part executes FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, delivering 1,177.6 GFLOPS of FP16 against 588.8 GFLOPS of FP32. This indicates different approaches to mixed-precision compute, with AMD treating FP16 and FP32 as equivalent throughput and Intel dedicating additional hardware to FP16 operations.

Both architectures support identical API feature sets: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The ray tracing implementation differs in scale, with AMD integrating 16 dedicated ray tracing cores against Intel's single core. The pixel and texture rate figures reflect the underlying execution resource counts, with AMD's 92.80 GPixel/s and 185.6 GTexel/s representing a tenfold advantage over Intel's 9.200 GPixel/s and 18.40 GTexel/s.

The power characteristics reveal an interesting architectural tradeoff. The AMD part maintains a 15 W TDP despite its larger execution resource pool, while the Intel part consumes 25 W with far fewer execution units. The AMD part achieves its higher throughput at lower power, suggesting the RDNA 3.5 architecture delivers better performance per watt in this comparison, at least on paper.

The Verdict

The database contains a complete set of benchmark results for the AMD Radeon 890M and no benchmark results for the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile. Any performance comparison between the two must therefore rely on the recorded specification data rather than measured outcomes. Those specifications show the AMD part with an eightfold advantage in shading units, texture mapping units, and raster operations, a sixteenfold advantage in ray tracing cores, and a tenfold advantage in FP32 compute throughput. The AMD part also boosts higher at 2900 MHz against Intel's 2300 MHz, uses a larger die at 233 mm² with 34,000 million transistors, and carries a lower TDP of 15 W against Intel's 25 W.

The Intel part counters with a smaller process node at 3 nm versus 4 nm, a later release date of 2026-04-15 versus 2024-07-14, and a higher FP16-to-FP32 ratio at 2:1 versus 1:1. The 3 nm process node does not translate into a performance advantage in the recorded specifications, as the Intel part's execution resource counts and theoretical throughput figures all fall below the AMD part's.

The AMD Radeon 890M's average benchmark score of 9210 places it in the 45th percentile of all GPUs, within one percent of its nearest rivals. The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile holds a 50th percentile ranking in the database, but this ranking is based on zero recorded benchmarks and an average score of 0, so it carries no evidentiary weight.

For workloads that depend on raw shading throughput, texture filtering, pixel fill, or ray tracing, the recorded data points to the AMD Radeon 890M. For workloads that emphasize FP16 compute relative to FP32, the Intel part's 2:1 ratio is the only specification advantage in its favor. The absence of benchmark data for the Intel part means the database cannot confirm how that FP16 capability translates into real-world performance.

The power envelope also favors AMD in this comparison. A 15 W TDP with higher theoretical throughput across every measured metric indicates the RDNA 3.5 implementation extracts more work per watt than the Xe3-LPG implementation, based strictly on the recorded figures. The Intel part's 25 W TDP with lower throughput suggests it trades efficiency for its smaller process node and later release date, though no measured data exists to verify this interpretation.

The choice between these two comes down to what the database can substantiate. The AMD Radeon 890M has ten recorded benchmark scores, a measured average of 9210, and specification-level dominance in execution units, clocks, and compute rates. The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile has no recorded benchmarks, unknown transistor count and die size, and lower specification figures across the board. On the available data, the AMD part is the only one with demonstrated performance, and its theoretical capabilities exceed the Intel part's in every quantified category.