AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs Intel Arc 130T Mobile Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data positions the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and Intel Arc 130T Mobile as two fundamentally different solutions with distinct target applications. The AMD part is a discrete, single-slot workstation card built on the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the Intel part is an integrated GPU (IGP) within the Arrow Lake-H processor family, using Xe-LPG+ architecture.

Based strictly on specifications, the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers significantly higher raw compute throughput. Its FP32 performance is 7.885 TFLOPS, which is exactly double the 3.942 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc 130T Mobile. The AMD card also doubles the shading units (1792 vs 896), texture mapping units (112 vs 56), and raster operation units (64 vs 28). The AMD part has 28 ray tracing cores versus 7 on the Intel part. In pixel throughput, the AMD card achieves 70.40 GPixel/s versus 61.60 GPixel/s for the Intel chip, a 14.3% advantage.

The Intel Arc 130T Mobile, however, consumes less power at 35 W TDP versus 55 W for the AMD card. It also has a higher boost clock at 2200 MHz versus 1100 MHz for the AMD part. The Intel solution uses system shared memory, meaning its bandwidth is system dependent, whereas the AMD card has dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth on a 128-bit bus.

For users requiring a dedicated, self-contained graphics solution with its own video memory and consistent performance regardless of system memory configuration, the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is the clear choice. For portable devices where power efficiency and integration matter more than raw throughput, the Intel Arc 130T Mobile fits that use case. The data does not include actual benchmark scores, so the verdict rests on architectural and specification differences.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS, which is exactly double the 3.942 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc 130T Mobile.

Q: How do the memory systems differ?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory with a 128-bit bus and 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc 130T Mobile uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a 55 W TDP, while the Intel Arc 130T Mobile has a 35 W TDP.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 28 ray tracing cores, while the Intel Arc 130T Mobile has 7 ray tracing cores.

Q: What process nodes are used?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Arc 130T Mobile uses a 5 nm process, also at TSMC.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

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

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is built on the Navi 33 chip using RDNA 3.0 architecture with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish." It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The chip is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, containing 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². Its predecessor is listed as the Radeon Pro Vega.

The Intel Arc 130T Mobile uses the Arrow Lake-H chip with Xe-LPG+ architecture, belonging to the Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) generation. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown. Its predecessor is HD Graphics-M.

The AMD architecture provides dedicated hardware resources for graphics and compute tasks. The Intel architecture is designed for integration into mobile processors, sharing system resources. The AMD card has a 128-bit memory bus connecting to its dedicated GDDR6 memory. The Intel part has no dedicated memory bus, instead relying on system shared memory.

Both architectures support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, indicating feature parity in API support. The AMD card has a pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 123.2 GTexel/s. The Intel part has a pixel rate of 61.60 GPixel/s and the same texture rate of 123.2 GTexel/s.

The AMD RDNA 3.0 architecture achieves FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 7.885 TFLOPS. The Intel Xe-LPG+ architecture achieves FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning 7.885 TFLOPS FP16 versus 3.942 TFLOPS FP32.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz, while the Intel Arc 130T Mobile has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The Intel part boosts to double the AMD card's boost frequency.

Memory configuration differs completely. The AMD card has 8 GB GDDR6 memory at 1350 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective speed, a 128-bit bus, and 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

The AMD card has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Intel part has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, 28 ROPs, and 7 ray tracing cores. Every compute unit count on the AMD card is exactly double or more than the Intel part.

Power consumption differs: the AMD card has a 55 W TDP, while the Intel part has a 35 W TDP. The AMD card is a single-slot discrete card with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Intel part is an IGP with no power connectors listed and no suggested PSU. The AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the Intel part uses IGP bus interface.

Physical dimensions are only listed for the AMD card: 168 mm length, 69 mm height, and 20 mm width. The Intel part has no listed dimensions, consistent with its integrated nature. The AMD card has 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the Intel part's display outputs are portable device dependent.

Release dates differ: the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 was released on 2025-08-02, while the Intel Arc 130T Mobile was released on 2025-01-12. Both have active production status. Neither has a listed launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for these two GPUs. The winsA and winsB fields are both zero, and the headToHeadBenchmarks array is empty. Similarly, the benchmarks array for each individual GPU is empty, and the avgBenchmarkScore for both is 0.

Without direct benchmark measurements, the comparison must rely on specification-derived performance indicators. The FP32 compute ratio is the most straightforward: the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 at 7.885 TFLOPS delivers exactly twice the FP32 throughput of the Intel Arc 130T Mobile at 3.942 TFLOPS. This indicates that in FP32-heavy workloads, the AMD card should complete tasks in approximately half the time of the Intel part, assuming no other bottlenecks.

The pixel rate comparison shows the AMD card at 70.40 GPixel/s versus 61.60 GPixel/s for the Intel part, a 14.3% advantage for AMD. The texture rate is identical at 123.2 GTexel/s for both GPUs. This suggests that texture-bound workloads may perform similarly between the two, while pixel-bound workloads favor the AMD card.

The AMD card's dedicated memory provides a clear advantage in bandwidth: 172.8 GB/s versus system dependent bandwidth for the Intel part. In practice, system shared memory bandwidth depends on the host system's memory configuration, which introduces variability. The AMD card's fixed 172.8 GB/s offers predictable performance.

The Intel part's boost clock of 2200 MHz is double the AMD card's 1100 MHz, which may help close the gap in some latency-sensitive workloads, but the AMD card's doubled shading units and ROPs provide a structural advantage in parallel throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 wins in scenarios requiring maximum compute throughput. Its 7.885 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 28 ray tracing cores, and 1792 shading units position it for demanding graphics workloads. The dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth ensures consistent performance without depending on system memory. The 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs make it suitable for multi-display professional setups. The single-slot form factor with 250 W suggested PSU indicates it is designed for workstation integration.

The Intel Arc 130T Mobile wins in scenarios prioritizing power efficiency and system integration. Its 35 W TDP versus 55 W for the AMD card means lower power consumption. The 2200 MHz boost clock indicates it can reach high frequencies when needed. As an IGP, it requires no additional slot space or power connectors. Its release date of 2025-01-12 predates the AMD card by about seven months, suggesting earlier market availability. The system shared memory approach means it can access as much memory as the host system provides, potentially exceeding the AMD card's fixed 8 GB capacity in memory-heavy scenarios, though bandwidth remains system dependent.

The AMD card's pixel rate advantage (70.40 vs 61.60 GPixel/s) suggests it wins in rasterization-heavy workloads. The identical texture rate (123.2 GTexel/s) indicates texture-heavy workloads may perform equivalently. The AMD card's 1:1 FP16 ratio means it does not gain additional throughput in FP16 workloads, while the Intel part's 2:1 FP16 ratio means it achieves 7.885 TFLOPS FP16, matching the AMD card's FP16 output despite lower FP32 performance.

For ray tracing workloads, the AMD card's 28 ray tracing cores versus 7 on the Intel part indicates a substantial advantage. For FP32 compute workloads, the AMD card's doubled shading units and doubled FP32 TFLOPS indicate clear superiority. For power-constrained mobile applications, the Intel part's lower TDP and integrated design make it the practical choice.