AMD Radeon R9 M395X vs Intel Arc A370M Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data favors the Intel Arc A370M decisively. In the recorded geekbench OpenCL test, the Arc A370M scores 29,676 against the Radeon R9 M395X's 17,829. That is a 66.4% advantage for the Intel part, a substantial margin that places these two mobile GPUs in different performance tiers. The aggregate benchmark average also reflects this gap: the Arc A370M sits at 29,175 across all recorded tests, while the Radeon R9 M395X averages 25,891. The nearest rival data confirms the positioning: the Arc A370M's closest competitor, the AMD Radeon RX Vega GH, scores 29,197, a mere 0.1% difference, while the R9 M395X is compared most directly to the AMD FirePro W7100 at 25,856, which the Radeon trails by only 0.1%.

The head-to-head record is one win for the Intel product and zero for the AMD part. No benchmark in the database shows the Radeon R9 M395X ahead. The performance spread is consistent across the two recorded tests: the Arc scores 29,676 in OpenCL and the Radeon scores 17,829, a 66.4% delta, while in the Vulkan test the Arc reaches 28,673 versus the Radeon's 17,829, which is a 60.8% delta. Every measurement in the database places the Intel Arc A370M at least 60% ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 M395X.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design lineages. The Intel Arc A370M uses the DG2-128 chip, built on the Xe-HPG architecture, and is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It packs 7,200 million transistors into a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon R9 M395X, by contrast, uses the Amethyst chip with GCN 3.0 architecture, made on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 5,000 million transistors on a 366 mm² die. That works out to 13.7 million transistors per square millimeter, roughly three times lower density than the Intel part.

Memory configuration also differs sharply. The Arc A370M comes with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R9 M395X carries 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit interface, achieving a higher 160.0 GB/s. The Intel part has fewer ROPs (32 versus 32, a tie) but is well ahead in shading units: 1024 versus 2048. Both parts have 64 texture mapping units. The Arc A370M includes 8 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the AMD GPU.

Clock behavior shows a different approach. The base clock of the Arc A370M is 1550 MHz with a 2050 MHz boost, while the Radeon R9 M395X runs with no published base or boost clocks in the database. The Intel part's memory clock is 1750 MHz, quoted as 14 Gbps effective, while the AMD memory runs at 1250 MHz with 5 Gbps effective. The pixel pipeline favors Intel heavily: 65.60 GPixel/s against 23.14 GPixel/s for the Radeon. Texture fill rate is also lopsided: 131.2 GTexel/s versus 92.54 GTexel/s.

Where Each One Wins

The Arc A370M wins every single benchmark in the database, so the "where each one wins" section is short. The only measured category where AMD has a broadly comparable result is in the geekbench_opencl test, but even there the Arc leads by a huge margin. The nearest rival data for the Radeon R9 M395X shows its average score falls 0.2% below the AMD FirePro W7100, a close grouping. For the Intel part, the closest competitor is the AMD Radeon RX Vega 7, which sits 0.1% above it.

Use-case segmentation follows the numbers. For users whose workload is dominated by OpenCL compute, the Arc A370M is the clear pick: it is 66% faster than the Radeon in the geekbench_opencl test. For Vulkan-based tasks, the Arc again wins by 60.8%. There is no test in the database where the AMD Radeon R9 M395X holds the lead.

In terms of platform fit, the Arc A370M is a PCIe 4.0 x8 part; the Radeon R9 M395X is a PCIe 3.0 x16 part. The Intel part is a MXM module, whereas the AMD is also an MXM module. Display outputs are portable device dependent for both. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. In shading capabilities, the Arc A370M has 1,024 shaders, the Radeon has 2,048. The Arc has 64 TMUs and 32 ROPs; the Radeon also has 32 ROPs but only 128 TMUs. The Arc includes 8 RT cores, a feature absent from the Radeon.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU scores higher in OpenCL benchmarks?

A: The Intel Arc A370M scores 29,676 compared to the AMD Radeon R9 M395X's 17,829, a 66.4% gap. The Arc also wins the Vulkan test (28,673 versus 17,829) and the average benchmark score (29,175 versus 25,891).

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Arc A370M has 112.0 GB/s with 4 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus. The Radeon R9 M395X offers 160.0 GB/s using 8 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has ray tracing cores?

A: The Intel Arc A370M includes 8 ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon R9 M395X does not list any ray tracing cores.

Q: How do the architectures differ?

A: The Arc A370M is built on Intel's Xe-HPG architecture with a DG2-128 chip, 6nm process, and 7,200 million transistors. The Radeon R9 M395X is GCN 3.0 with an Amethyst chip, 28nm process, and 5,000 million transistors. The Intel has a die size of 157mm² and a density of 45.9M/mm²; the AMD has a die of 366mm² and a density of 13.7M/mm².

Q: Which GPU has the higher texture fill rate?

A: The Arc A370M reaches 131.2 GTexel/s, while the Radeon R9 M395X reaches 92.54 GTexel/s. The Intel's pixel rate is also higher: 65.60 GPixel/s versus 23.14 GPixel/s.

Q: What are the FP32 performance numbers?

A: The Arc A370M is rated at 4.198 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.397 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The Radeon R9 M395X is rated at 2.961 TFLOPS FP32 and 2.961 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1).

Q: Which has more shading units?

A: The Arc A370M has 1,024 shading units, the Radeon R9 M395X has 2,048. The AMD part has twice the shading units but still loses heavily in measured performance.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Arc A370M | AMD Radeon R9 M395X |

|---|---|

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | GCN 3.0 |

| Process | 6 nm: TSMC | 28 nm: TSMC |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 5,000 million |

| Die size | 157 mm² | 366 mm² |

| Density | 45.9M/mm² | 13.7M/mm² |

| Memory | 4 GB GDDR6 | 8 GB GDDR5 |

| Bus width | 64-bit | 128-bit |

| Bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | 160.3 GB/s |

| Shading units | 1,024 | 2,048 |

| TMUs | 64 | 128 |

| ROPs | 32 | 32 |

| RT cores | 8 | none |

| Pixel rate | 65.60 GPixel/s | 23.14 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 131.2 GTexel/s | 92.54 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.198 TFLOPS | 2.961 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 7.397 (2:1) | 1.961 (1:1) |

| Bus | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| TDP | 35 W | 75 W |

The Verdict

Strictly from the recorded data, the Intel Arc A370M is the pick in every measurable performance category. The 66.4% lead in OpenCL and 64.8% lead in Vulkan are not narrow margins; they place the two parts in different performance leagues. The Radeon R9 M395X has advantages in memory capacity (8 GB versus 4 GB) and memory bandwidth (160.3 GB/s versus 112.0 GB/s), but those do not translate into wins in any benchmark. The Arc A370M's architecture is also much denser (45.9M transistors per mm² vs 13.7M), and it brings features the AMD part lacks, such as 8 ray tracing cores. The Radeon R9 M395X is a legacy product (end-of-life) from the 2015 "Polaris Mobile" generation, while the Arc A370M is the newer Alchemist (Arc 3 Mobile) generation released in 2022. For raw benchmark results, the Intel Arc A370M is the stronger mobile GPU.