AMD Radeon PRO W7700 vs Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 compare to the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile in terms of raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 delivers 31.95 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile delivers 2.355 TFLOPS. This places the AMD part at over 13 times the FP32 throughput of the Intel solution.

Q: What is the difference in memory configuration between these two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses System Shared memory, meaning its capacity, bus width, and bandwidth are all system dependent.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same modern graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part also includes 48 ray tracing cores, while the Intel part has 4.

Q: How do the power requirements differ?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 has a 190 W TDP with a suggested power supply of 450 W and uses a single 8-pin power connector. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has a 25 W TDP, uses no power connectors, and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP).

Q: What is the difference in physical form factor?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 is a dual-slot, 241 mm (9.5 inches) long, 111 mm (4.4 inches) tall add-in card with PCIe 4.0 x16 interface and four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is an IGP with no slot width, no dimensions listed, and portable-device-dependent display outputs.

Q: How do the benchmark scores compare between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 has recorded benchmark scores of 108245 in Geekbench OpenCL and 129706 in Geekbench Vulkan, with an average benchmark score of 118976. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has no recorded benchmark scores in the database and its average benchmark score is 0.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 wins in every measurable category where data exists. It is a discrete workstation GPU with dedicated memory, a 190 W power envelope, and a 95th percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is an integrated solution, capped at 25 W, with system-shared memory and a 50th percentile ranking.

For compute-heavy workflows such as rendering, simulation, or GPU-accelerated video processing, the AMD part has overwhelming advantages in texture rate (499.2 GTexel/s versus 73.60 GTexel/s), pixel rate (249.6 GPixel/s versus 36.80 GPixel/s), and FP32 throughput. The Intel part's only practical advantage is its minimal power draw and integrated nature, which suits thin-and-light portable devices where discrete graphics cannot be installed.

The AMD card also wins on memory bandwidth by a wide margin. Its dedicated 576.0 GB/s GDDR6 bandwidth versus the Intel part's system-dependent shared memory means the AMD part will not contend with the CPU for memory access. The Intel part's performance will vary based on the host system's memory configuration, while the AMD card's performance is consistent and self-contained.

The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile does have one advantage: its 3 nm process node from Intel is smaller than AMD's 5 nm node from TSMC, and its 25 W TDP makes it suitable for passively cooled or battery-constrained designs. However, these physical attributes do not translate into benchmark wins, as the database contains no recorded scores for the Intel part.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 is built on the Navi 32 chip using RDNA 3.0 architecture, produced on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It contains 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 81.2M per mm². The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses the Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture, produced on Intel's 3 nm process. Its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database.

The AMD part belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi generation (Navi III Series) with the codename Wheat Nas. The Intel part belongs to the Arc Graphics-M generation (Panther Lake) with no codename listed. The AMD GPU is a discrete component with a dual-slot cooler and a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the Intel GPU is an integrated processor with an IGP bus interface.

Both architectures support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so they are feature-compatible at the API level. However, the internal resources differ substantially: the AMD part has 3072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, 96 ROPs, and 48 ray tracing cores. The Intel part has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores.

The AMD card uses GDDR6 memory with a 256-bit bus and 18 Gbps effective speed. The Intel part uses system-shared memory with the type, bus width, and bandwidth all marked as system dependent. This is a fundamental architectural difference: one is a self-contained memory subsystem, the other relies entirely on host system resources.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 was released on 2023-11-12, while the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has a release date of 2026-01-26. The AMD part's predecessor is the Radeon Pro Vega, while the Intel part has no predecessor listed in the database.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field in the database.

Process and physical: AMD uses a 5 nm TSMC process with 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die. Intel uses a 3 nm process with unknown transistor count and die size. The AMD card measures 241 mm (9.5 inches) by 111 mm (4.4 inches) and is dual-slot. The Intel part is an IGP with no dimensions or slot width.

Clock speeds: AMD runs at a 1900 MHz base clock and 2600 MHz boost clock, with memory at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). Intel runs at a 300 MHz base clock and 2300 MHz boost clock with system-shared memory.

Compute resources: AMD has 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 48 ray tracing cores. Intel has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores. Neither has tensor cores listed.

Rates: AMD achieves 249.6 GPixel/s pixel rate, 499.2 GTexel/s texture rate, 31.95 TFLOPS FP32, and 63.90 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). Intel achieves 36.80 GPixel/s, 73.60 GTexel/s, 2.355 TFLOPS FP32, and 4.710 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1).

Memory: AMD has 16 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. Intel uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Power and cooling: AMD has a 190 W TDP, requires a 450 W suggested PSU, uses a single 8-pin connector, and is dual-slot. Intel has a 25 W TDP, uses no power connectors, has no suggested PSU, and is an IGP.

Outputs and interface: AMD offers 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs and PCIe 4.0 x16. Intel offers portable-device-dependent outputs and an IGP bus interface.

Release and status: AMD released on 2023-11-12 with a launch MSRP of 999 USD. Intel releases on 2026-01-26 with no launch MSRP listed and is marked as Active production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these two GPUs. The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 has individual recorded scores: 108245 in Geekbench OpenCL and 129706 in Geekbench Vulkan, producing an average benchmark score of 118976. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has no recorded benchmarks and an average score of 0.

The AMD part sits at the 95th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GB10 (average score 117393, 1.3% behind), the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation (117088, 1.6% behind), the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114395, 4% behind), and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (113944, 4.4% behind). This places the AMD card in competitive territory with some of NVIDIA's strongest workstation and mobile offerings.

The Intel part sits at the 50th percentile with no rivals listed and no scores recorded. Without benchmark data, the database cannot establish a performance relationship between the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile and any other GPU.

The FP32 compute gap is the most decisive recorded difference: 31.95 TFLOPS versus 2.355 TFLOPS. The AMD card also leads in texture rate by a factor of roughly 6.8 (499.2 versus 73.60 GTexel/s) and pixel rate by a factor of roughly 6.8 as well (249.6 versus 36.80 GPixel/s). The memory bandwidth advantage is even starker, with 576.0 GB/s of dedicated bandwidth against a system-dependent figure for the Intel part.

The AMD card's 48 ray tracing cores versus 4 on the Intel part suggests a significant difference in ray-traced workloads, though no direct ray tracing benchmarks are present in the database to quantify it. The AMD card's 16 GB of GDDR6 memory versus system-shared memory also implies a major difference in large dataset handling, but again, no direct benchmark confirms this.

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 is the clear choice for any workload requiring substantial GPU compute, dedicated memory, or workstation-class features. Its 95th percentile ranking, 118976 average benchmark score, and 31.95 TFLOPS FP32 throughput place it in an entirely different performance class from the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile. The recorded data shows a 13.5-fold advantage in FP32 compute, a 6.8-fold advantage in both texture and pixel rates, and a dedicated 576.0 GB/s memory subsystem versus system-shared memory.

The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has no recorded benchmarks, no rivals, and an average score of 0. Its 25 W TDP and integrated nature make it suitable for portable devices where power efficiency and physical space are the primary constraints. The 3 nm process node and 50th percentile ranking indicate it is a mid-tier integrated solution, but the database contains no performance data to support a stronger assessment.

For a workstation or professional user who needs a discrete GPU with 16 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory, four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, and PCIe 4.0 x16 connectivity, the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 delivers all of that with a launch MSRP of 999 USD. The Intel part offers none of these features; it is an IGP with portable-device-dependent outputs and no discrete memory.

The data does not support any scenario where the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile outperforms the AMD Radeon PRO W7700. The only categories where the Intel part leads are power consumption (25 W versus 190 W) and process node size (3 nm versus 5 nm). Neither of these translates into a performance win in the database. Users who need a compact, low-power integrated GPU for a portable device should consider the Intel part; users who need actual graphics performance should choose the AMD card.