AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs Intel Arc G3 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and the Intel Arc G3. Both GPUs hold identical percentile positions against all GPUs, each at the 50th percentile, and both show an average benchmark score of zero in the recorded data. This absence of direct comparative measurements means the performance relationship must be derived from their individual specifications and architectural characteristics rather than from empirical testing.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc G3 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS in the same precision. This translates to a 28.3% advantage for the AMD card in raw single-precision throughput. The AMD card also leads in texture fill rate at 123.2 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s, a 28.3% margin that mirrors the FP32 gap. In pixel throughput, the AMD part reaches 70.40 GPixel/s compared to 48.00 GPixel/s for the Intel chip, representing a 46.7% advantage.

The Intel Arc G3 fights back in half-precision compute. Its FP16 throughput of 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1 rate) exceeds the AMD card's 7.885 TFLOPS (1:1 rate) by 55.9%. This indicates the Intel architecture dedicates more hardware to reduced-precision workloads, which can matter for AI inference and certain compute tasks that tolerate FP16 arithmetic.

Clock behavior also differs significantly. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 shows a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz, while the Intel Arc G3 shows a base of 300 MHz and a boost of 2400 MHz. The Intel chip's boost clock is 118.2% higher than its base, whereas the AMD card's boost represents a 233.3% uplift over its base. However, the AMD card's absolute boost clock remains far lower, which partially explains its lower FP32 output despite having 1792 shading units versus 1280 for the Intel part.

The AMD card's shading unit count is 40% higher, its texture mapping units total 112 versus 40, a 180% advantage, and its render output units reach 64 versus 20, a 220% advantage. The AMD card also carries 28 ray tracing cores against 10 for the Intel chip, a 180% difference.

Neither GPU has recorded wins in the head-to-head benchmark section. The database shows zero wins for each part, reinforcing that no direct competitive measurements currently exist in the record.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 28.3% higher than the Intel Arc G3's 6.144 TFLOPS.

Q: Does the Intel Arc G3 outperform the AMD card in any compute metric?

A: Yes, in FP16 throughput. The Intel Arc G3 reaches 12.29 TFLOPS at a 2:1 rate, which is 55.9% higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W7400's 7.885 TFLOPS at a 1:1 rate.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc G3 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, meaning its memory performance depends entirely on the host platform.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a 55 W TDP and suggests a 250 W power supply, with no power connectors required. The Intel Arc G3 has a 25 W TDP, is an integrated graphics processor, and requires no power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Intel Arc G3 uses a 3 nm process from Intel's own foundry, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses a 6 nm process from TSMC.

Q: Are both GPUs currently in production?

A: Yes, both the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and the Intel Arc G3 have an active production status in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 wins in scenarios that demand high FP32 throughput, high texture fill, and high pixel output. Its 7.885 TFLOPS FP32 rate and 123.2 GTexel/s texture rate suit traditional 3D rendering workloads where single-precision math dominates. The 70.40 GPixel/s pixel rate supports high-resolution rasterization with heavy fragment shading. The dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent, predictable memory performance independent of the host system, which matters for professional workloads that require stable frame times and reliable data streaming.

The AMD card's 28 ray tracing cores versus 10 for the Intel part suggests stronger dedicated ray tracing throughput for applications that use hardware-accelerated ray tracing. Its 1792 shading units provide a 40% advantage in parallel execution capacity, and the 112 TMUs deliver a 180% advantage in texture address and filtering operations.

The Intel Arc G3 wins in FP16 compute scenarios. Its 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 throughput at a 2:1 rate means applications that can use half-precision arithmetic will execute faster on the Intel part. This includes certain machine learning inference workloads, some image processing pipelines, and compute tasks explicitly written for FP16. The Intel chip's 2400 MHz boost clock also indicates higher frequency headroom, though this manifests across fewer execution units.

Power-constrained environments favor the Intel Arc G3. Its 25 W TDP is less than half the AMD card's 55 W TDP. As an integrated processor, it requires no separate card slot, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU rating. Systems where physical space and power draw are critical constraints will find the Intel part easier to accommodate.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 stands as a discrete card with a single-slot design, measuring 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. It offers four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, making it suitable for multi-monitor professional setups. The Intel Arc G3's display outputs are portable device dependent, meaning its connectivity options vary by the host device.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the Intel Arc G3 uses the Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture. The AMD part comes from TSMC's 6 nm process, while the Intel part uses Intel's 3 nm process.

Transistor counts show a clear divergence: the AMD card contains 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, giving a density of 65.2M per mm². The Intel chip's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database.

Memory architecture separates the two fundamentally. The AMD card has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel card uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, meaning it borrows from the host system's main memory rather than carrying dedicated VRAM.

Compute unit counts differ substantially. The AMD card has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Intel card has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs, and 10 ray tracing cores. The AMD part leads each category by margins ranging from 40% to 220%.

Clock speeds follow opposite patterns. The AMD card's base is 330 MHz with a boost of 1100 MHz. The Intel card's base is 300 MHz with a boost of 2400 MHz. The Intel chip's boost clock is more than double the AMD card's boost clock.

Power draw differs by more than double: 55 W TDP for the AMD card versus 25 W for the Intel part. The AMD card is a single-slot discrete GPU requiring a 250 W suggested PSU, while the Intel part is an integrated graphics processor with no PSU suggestion. The AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x8 as its bus interface; the Intel part uses IGP.

Display outputs also differ: the AMD card provides 4x DisplayPort 2.1, while the Intel card's outputs are portable device dependent. Physical dimensions exist only for the AMD card: 168 mm length, 69 mm height, and 20 mm width. The Intel card has no recorded dimensions since it is integrated.

Release dates place the AMD card in 2025-08-02 and the Intel card in 2026-05-31. The AMD card has a listed predecessor, the Radeon Pro Vega, while the Intel card has no predecessor recorded. Neither card has a successor listed in the database.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 implements RDNA 3.0 architecture on the Navi 33 chip, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish. This belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The Intel Arc G3 implements Xe3-LPG architecture on the Panther Lake chip, belonging to the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation.

The manufacturing processes represent two different foundries and technology nodes. AMD uses TSMC at 6 nm, while Intel uses its own foundry at 3 nm. This gives the Intel chip a process advantage in terms of feature size, though the AMD card compensates with a much larger die of 204 mm² containing 13,300 million transistors. The Intel chip's transistor count and die size remain unknown in the database.

Memory architecture reflects the fundamental design philosophy difference. The AMD card uses dedicated GDDR6 memory with a 128-bit bus and 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel card shares system memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent. This means the AMD card offers predictable memory performance regardless of host platform, while the Intel card's memory throughput varies based on the system's memory configuration and speed.

The compute pipelines differ in both width and precision handling. AMD's RDNA 3.0 provides FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning the same hardware executes both precisions at equal throughput. Intel's Xe3-LPG provides FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning half-precision operations run at twice the throughput of single-precision. This architectural choice explains why the Intel chip delivers 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 despite having lower FP32 throughput.

Execution unit counts highlight the different design goals. The AMD card carries 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The Intel card carries 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs. The AMD card also integrates 28 ray tracing cores versus 10 for the Intel part. These differences suggest the AMD architecture allocates more silicon to parallel rasterization and texturing, while the Intel architecture emphasizes frequency and reduced precision throughput.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, indicating parity in API support. The AMD card's RDNA 3.0 design targets discrete professional graphics with dedicated display outputs and a fixed power envelope of 55 W. The Intel card's Xe3-LPG design targets integrated graphics with a 25 W TDP, relying on the host platform for memory, display connectivity, and power delivery.

The bus interface separates them further: PCIe 4.0 x8 for AMD versus IGP for Intel. This means the AMD card connects as a discrete device with its own memory and cooling, while the Intel card lives on the processor package and shares system resources. The AMD card's single-slot form factor and 168 mm length suit workstation chassis, while the Intel part requires no additional board space.