AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs Intel Arc 130V Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and the Intel Arc 130V Mobile. Both entries show an average benchmark score of 0, and neither lists any nearest rivals or comparison scores. This absence of measured data is itself informative: it indicates that these two products have not been evaluated under identical test conditions in the database, so any performance comparison must be derived from their architectural specifications and theoretical throughput figures.

The raw computational numbers show a clear difference in raw power. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc 130V Mobile delivers 3.315 TFLOPS. That means the AMD part has more than double the single-precision throughput, a gap of roughly 138 percent. In FP16, the difference narrows slightly because the Intel part uses a 2:1 ratio, giving it 6.630 TFLOPS, while the AMD part runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, also yielding 7.885 TFLOPS. Even so, the AMD GPU still holds a lead of about 19 percent in FP16 work.

Pixel and texture throughput follow the same pattern. The Radeon PRO W7400 reaches 70.40 GPixel/s and 123.2 GTexel/s. The Arc 130V Mobile reaches 51.80 GPixel/s and 103.6 GTexel/s. The AMD card leads by roughly 36 percent in pixel fill rate and about 19 percent in texture fill rate. These are theoretical maxima, not measured frame rates, but they establish the relative ceiling for each design.

The Intel part does have one notable advantage in the specifications: its boost clock. The Arc 130V Mobile boosts to 1850 MHz, while the Radeon PRO W7400 boosts to 1100 MHz. The Intel GPU achieves this with a 3 nm process node, compared to the AMD card's 6 nm node. The higher clock speed helps the Intel part close some of the gap, but the AMD GPU's larger execution resource pool, 1792 shading units versus 896, and its 112 texture mapping units versus 56, keep it firmly ahead in aggregate throughput.

Memory bandwidth is another decisive split. The Radeon PRO W7400 has 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 172.8 GB/s. The Arc 130V Mobile uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." That means the Intel part's memory performance is contingent on the host platform's memory configuration, which introduces variability that the AMD card does not face. The AMD solution provides a fixed, dedicated bandwidth figure that does not fluctuate with system memory choices.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies and market positions. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses the Navi 33 chip, built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish." It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi generation, which is the Navi III Series. The Intel Arc 130V Mobile uses the Lunar Lake chip, built on the Xe2-LPG architecture, and belongs to the Arc Graphics-M generation for Lunar Lake.

The manufacturing processes differ substantially. The AMD card is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 13,300 million transistors packed into a 204 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 65.2 million per square millimeter. The Intel part is fabricated on a 3 nm process, also at TSMC, with a die size of 172 mm². Intel's transistor count is listed as unknown, and its transistor density is not recorded. The smaller process node gives Intel a potential efficiency advantage, but the lack of transistor data prevents a direct density comparison.

The execution resource counts are starkly different. The Radeon PRO W7400 has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 render output units, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Arc 130V Mobile has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, 28 render output units, and 7 ray tracing cores. The AMD GPU has exactly double the shading units, double the TMUs, and four times the ray tracing cores. The ROP count is actually higher on the AMD side as well, 64 versus 28, so the Intel part is smaller across every execution unit category.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The Radeon PRO W7400 uses dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory with a 128-bit interface and fixed 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc 130V Mobile uses system shared memory, meaning its memory size, bus width, and bandwidth are all dependent on the host system. This is a fundamental difference: the AMD card is a discrete GPU with its own memory pool, while the Intel part is an integrated graphics processor that borrows from system RAM.

The power envelopes reflect their physical forms. The Radeon PRO W7400 has a TDP of 55 W, is a single-slot card, requires no power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Arc 130V Mobile has a TDP of 37 W, is an IGP (integrated graphics processor), and has no listed power connector or PSU requirement. The Intel part uses less power, consistent with its mobile integrated design, while the AMD card is a low-profile discrete workstation GPU.

The bus interfaces differ as well. The AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Intel part uses an IGP bus interface, meaning it connects directly to the processor's integrated fabric rather than a PCIe slot. The display outputs also differ: the Radeon PRO W7400 has 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the Arc 130V Mobile's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its integration into mobile systems where display connectivity varies by laptop design.

Both GPUs support the same API levels: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This means software compatibility is equivalent at the API level, despite the underlying architectural differences. The ray tracing support is present on both, but the AMD card has four times the RT core count, which suggests a higher ceiling for ray-traced workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon PRO W7400 wins in every compute throughput category recorded. Its FP32 performance of 7.885 TFLOPS is more than double the Arc 130V Mobile's 3.315 TFLOPS. Its FP16 performance matches its FP32 at a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part achieves FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning the Intel GPU can process half-precision data at twice its single-precision rate. Even accounting for that, the AMD card's FP16 is 19 percent higher. For workloads that rely on raw shader compute, such as 3D rendering, scientific visualization, or GPU-accelerated simulations, the AMD card is the stronger choice on paper.

The pixel and texture rates favor the AMD card as well. The Radeon PRO W7400's 70.40 GPixel/s and 123.2 GTexel/s exceed the Intel part's 51.80 GPixel/s and 103.6 GTexel/s. These figures matter for rasterization-heavy tasks like CAD viewport rendering, video compositing, and high-resolution texture filtering. The AMD card's higher ROP count, 64 versus 28, supports its pixel rate advantage.

The AMD card also wins on memory determinism. With dedicated GDDR6 memory delivering a fixed 172.8 GB/s, performance is predictable and does not depend on the host system's memory configuration. The Intel part's system shared memory means its bandwidth could be lower or higher depending on whether the system uses single-channel or dual-channel memory, and what speed grade is installed. For a workstation GPU, predictable memory performance is a meaningful advantage because it removes a variable that could affect rendering times or simulation stability.

The Intel Arc 130V Mobile wins on power efficiency. Its 37 W TDP is 18 W lower than the AMD card's 55 W. For a mobile integrated GPU, that lower power draw is critical because it fits within the thermal and power budget of a thin laptop chassis. The AMD card, while still low-power for a discrete GPU, requires a slot and a 250 W suggested PSU, which places it in a desktop or workstation context.

The Intel part also wins on clock speed. Its 1850 MHz boost clock is significantly higher than the AMD card's 1100 MHz boost. While raw throughput is lower, the higher clock rate can translate to better responsiveness in lightly threaded or latency-sensitive tasks, where the GPU does not saturate its execution units. The 3 nm process node also gives the Intel part a manufacturing advantage that may yield better power-per-clock characteristics, though the database does not include measured efficiency data.

The base clocks also favor the Intel part slightly: 300 MHz versus 330 MHz for the AMD card. This is a minor point, but it indicates that the Intel GPU idles at a similar low frequency and ramps to a much higher boost.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc 130V Mobile delivers 3.315 TFLOPS. The AMD card is approximately 138 percent faster in single-precision workloads.

Q: How does memory differ between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc 130V Mobile uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent."

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a TDP of 55 W and lists a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Intel Arc 130V Mobile has a TDP of 37 W and lists no PSU requirement.

Q: Which part has more ray tracing cores?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 28 ray tracing cores, while the Intel Arc 130V Mobile has 7. The AMD card has four times the RT core count.

Q: Are the API feature levels the same?

A: Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The API support is identical between the two.

Q: What process nodes are used?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Arc 130V Mobile uses a 3 nm process, also at TSMC.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7400 | Intel Arc 130V Mobile |

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

| Chip | Navi 33 | Lunar Lake |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Xe2-LPG |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 3 nm |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 172 mm² |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | unknown |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 330 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1100 MHz | 1850 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 172.8 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 896 |

| TMUs | 112 | 56 |

| ROPs | 64 | 28 |

| RT Cores | 28 | 7 |

| Pixel Rate | 70.40 GPixel/s | 51.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 123.2 GTexel/s | 103.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.885 TFLOPS | 3.315 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 7.885 TFLOPS (1:1) | 6.630 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 55 W | 37 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | null |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | null |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | IGP |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions | 168 mm x 69 mm x 20 mm | null |

| Release Date | 2025-08-02 | 2024-09-23 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro Vega | HD Graphics-M |

The Verdict

The database shows two products aimed at different physical and performance tiers. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is a discrete single-slot workstation GPU with dedicated memory, a fixed power envelope, and substantially higher compute throughput. The Intel Arc 130V Mobile is an integrated mobile GPU that shares system memory, draws less power, and fits directly into a laptop processor package.

For workloads that demand maximum shader throughput, the Radeon PRO W7400 is the clear choice based on the recorded data. Its FP32 performance is more than double the Intel part, its pixel rate is 36 percent higher, and its texture rate is 19 percent higher. The dedicated 172.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth removes system dependency, and the 28 RT cores give it a fourfold advantage in ray tracing hardware. The 55 W TDP is modest for a discrete card, and the single-slot design fits in compact workstation chassis.

The Intel Arc 130V Mobile is the appropriate pick for ultra-portable systems where the 37 W TDP and integrated form factor are mandatory. Its 3 nm process node and 1850 MHz boost clock are the only recorded advantages, and they do not compensate for the roughly 58 percent lower FP32 throughput. The system shared memory is a constraint rather than a feature, as bandwidth cannot be stated as a fixed number.

The production status of both parts is listed as Active, so neither is discontinued. The release dates differ, with the Intel part arriving on 2024-09-23 and the AMD card arriving on 2025-08-02. The Radeon PRO W7400 succeeds the Radeon Pro Vega, while the Arc 130V Mobile succeeds the HD Graphics-M. There are no recorded successors for either.

The percentile ranking for both is 50 out of all GPUs in the database, which places them at the median. Without head-to-head benchmark scores, the specification comparison is the only quantitative basis for selection. The data indicates that the AMD card is the higher-performing part in every measurable throughput category, while the Intel part is the lower-power integrated alternative. The choice between them is determined by the system form factor and the need for fixed memory bandwidth versus minimal power draw.