AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM vs Intel Arc Graphics 24EU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM and the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU. The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM has no recorded benchmark entries in the database, while the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU has a single recorded result. This absence of overlapping test data means the comparison must rely on the Intel part's measured score and the architectural specifications of both components.

The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU records a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733. This places it at the 3rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, indicating that the vast majority of recorded graphics processors outperform it in this specific workload. The nearest rival data confirms the modest positioning: the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU scores 733 with a 0% delta, the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU also scores 733 with a 0% delta, the AMD Radeon HD 6470M scores 723 with a 1.4% delta (meaning the 24EU is 1.4% faster), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M scores 751 with a -2.4% delta (meaning the 24EU is 2.4% slower). These figures show that the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU sits within a narrow performance cluster around 733 points, with the closest competitors differing by only a few percentage points. The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM, lacking any benchmark scores, cannot be positioned within this same ranking structure.

The compute throughput figures provide a separate basis for comparison. The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM delivers 10.65 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU delivers 768.0 GFLOPS. Converting both to the same unit, the AMD part's 10,650 GFLOPS represents approximately 13.9 times the raw FP32 throughput of the Intel part. The FP16 comparison shows the AMD part at 10.65 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part reaches 1.536 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The AMD part therefore provides roughly 6.9 times the FP16 throughput. These are theoretical peak figures derived from shading unit counts and clock speeds, not measured benchmark results, but they indicate an enormous gap in raw compute capacity.

Pixel and texture rates reinforce the same conclusion. The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM records 166.4 GPixel/s and 166.4 GTexel/s. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU records 12.00 GPixel/s and 24.00 GTexel/s. The AMD part processes about 13.9 times the pixel throughput and 6.9 times the texture throughput. Memory bandwidth further separates the two: the AMD part uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus delivering 144.0 GB/s, while the Intel part relies on system shared memory with bandwidth labeled as system dependent. The dedicated memory interface of the AMD part provides a fixed, substantial bandwidth figure, whereas the Intel part's bandwidth is not quantified in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU wins in power efficiency at the package level. Its TDP is 65 W, compared to 92 W for the AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM. It also requires no power connectors and no suggested power supply rating, functioning as an integrated graphics processor on a Ring Bus interface. The AMD part requires a 1x 8-pin power connector and a suggested 250 W power supply, along with a dual-slot cooler. For systems where power draw and physical footprint are the primary constraints, the Intel part presents a lower-demand option.

The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU also wins on process node. It is manufactured on a 3 nm process at TSMC, while the AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM uses a 4 nm process at the same foundry. The Intel part's die is larger at 243 mm² versus 199 mm², and its transistor count is lower at 17,800 million versus 29,700 million. This results in a transistor density of 73.3M per mm² for the Intel part and 149.2M per mm² for the AMD part. The AMD design packs substantially more transistors into a smaller area.

The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM wins in nearly every performance-oriented category. It has 1024 shading units versus 192, 64 texture mapping units versus 12, and 64 raster output pipelines versus 6. The AMD part includes 16 ray tracing cores, while the Intel part records no ray tracing cores. Clock speeds favor the AMD part as well: a base clock of 1330 MHz versus 300 MHz, a boost clock of 2600 MHz versus 2000 MHz, and a game clock of 1920 MHz for the AMD part where the Intel part has no game clock listed. The AMD part uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus interface. The AMD part provides dedicated display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1b and 2x DisplayPort 2.1a), whereas the Intel part's display outputs are motherboard dependent.

The benchmark percentile ranking favors the AMD part indirectly. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU sits at the 3rd percentile of all GPUs. The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM sits at the 50th percentile, exactly the median of all recorded GPUs. While the AMD part has no direct benchmark score, its median percentile position indicates it outperforms roughly half of all GPUs in the database, a far stronger standing than the Intel part's near-bottom placement.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM uses the Navi 44 chip under the RDNA 4.0 architecture, belonging to the Navi IV generation within the Radeon RX 9000 series. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU uses the Arrow Lake-S chip under the Xe-LPG architecture, belonging to the Arc Graphics generation for Arrow Lake. The predecessor entries differ as well: the AMD part lists Navi III as its predecessor, while the Intel part lists HD Graphics.

The manufacturing processes differ by one node step. The AMD part is built on TSMC's 4 nm process, the Intel part on TSMC's 3 nm process. The AMD die measures 199 mm² with 29,700 million transistors, producing a density of 149.2M per mm². The Intel die measures 243 mm² with 17,800 million transistors, producing a density of 73.3M per mm². The AMD part achieves higher transistor density despite the larger process node, indicating a more compact logic design.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM uses 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, with a fixed bandwidth of 144.0 GB/s and a memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU uses system shared memory, with the bus width and bandwidth both listed as system dependent. The AMD part's memory clock is fixed, while the Intel part's memory performance depends entirely on the host system's memory configuration.

The compute pipeline configurations differ sharply. The AMD part has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 16 ray tracing cores. The Intel part has 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, 6 ROPs, and no ray tracing cores. The FP16 ratio also differs: the AMD part runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the Intel part runs FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning the Intel part's FP16 throughput is double its FP32 throughput.

Power delivery and cooling differ by design class. The AMD part is a dual-slot discrete card requiring a 1x 8-pin power connector and a 250 W suggested power supply. The Intel part is an integrated graphics processor with no power connectors and no suggested PSU rating. The AMD part's TDP is 92 W, the Intel part's is 65 W. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Release dates show a generational gap. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU was released on 2024-10-23, while the AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM was released on 2026-07-27. Both are listed as active production parts.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher benchmark percentile ranking?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM sits at the 50th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU sits at the 3rd percentile.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU outperform any recorded rivals?

A: Yes, it is 1.4% faster than the AMD Radeon HD 6470M, which scores 723. It ties the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and 64EU at 733 points, and it is 2.4% slower than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M, which scores 751.

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM in raw FP32 compute?

A: The AMD part delivers 10.65 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the Intel part delivers 768.0 GFLOPS, making the AMD part approximately 13.9 times faster in theoretical peak FP32.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 144.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU uses system shared memory with bandwidth dependent on the host system.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

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

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM has a 92 W TDP, requires a 1x 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 250 W power supply. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU has a 65 W TDP and requires no power connectors or suggested power supply.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM | Intel Arc Graphics 24EU |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 4.0 | Xe-LPG |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Transistors | 29,700 million | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | 199 mm² | 243 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 149.2M / mm² | 73.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1330 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2600 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Game Clock | 1920 MHz | None |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 144.0 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective | None |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 192 |

| TMUs | 64 | 12 |

| ROPs | 64 | 6 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 16 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 166.4 GPixel/s | 12.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 166.4 GTexel/s | 24.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 10.65 TFLOPS | 768.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 10.65 TFLOPS (1:1) | 1.536 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 92 W | 65 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | Ring Bus |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a | Motherboard Dependent |

| Release Date | 2026-07-27 | 2024-10-23 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 50 | 3 |

The Verdict

The recorded data separates these two parts into entirely different performance classes. The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM operates at the median of all GPUs in the database, with a 50th percentile ranking, and delivers peak FP32 throughput of 10.65 TFLOPS, a pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 166.4 GTexel/s. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU operates near the bottom of the database at the 3rd percentile, with a measured 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733, FP32 throughput of 768.0 GFLOPS, a pixel rate of 12.00 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 24.00 GTexel/s. Every direct performance metric in the database favors the AMD part by a factor of roughly 7 to 14.

The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU holds advantages only in power draw, process node, and integration. It draws 65 W versus 92 W, uses a 3 nm process versus 4 nm, requires no power connectors, and operates as an integrated processor with motherboard-dependent outputs. These characteristics suit systems where a discrete GPU is not desired and where the host platform provides shared memory bandwidth.

The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM requires a 250 W suggested power supply, a 1x 8-pin connector, and a dual-slot cooler. It provides dedicated HDMI 2.1b and DisplayPort 2.1a outputs, 4 GB of GDDR6 memory with 144.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and 16 ray tracing cores. The Intel part records no ray tracing cores at all. The AMD part's release date of 2026-07-27 also places it nearly two years after the Intel part's 2024-10-23 release.

For workloads involving 3D rendering, texture processing, or ray tracing, the database shows the AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM as the only viable option between the two. For a system requiring minimal power draw, no discrete cooling, and no additional power cabling, the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU is the part that matches those constraints. The benchmark data for the Intel part confirms its low-end positioning, while the AMD part's median percentile places it in the middle of the database rather than at the extremes. The choice between them depends entirely on whether the priority is raw graphics throughput or low-power integration.