AMD Radeon RX 9050 vs Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for these two parts. The database shows zero benchmark entries for both the AMD Radeon RX 9050 and the Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile, and the head-to-head comparison field is empty. This absence of measured scores means the comparison must rely entirely on the architectural and specification differences captured in the database.

What the database does provide is a percentile ranking against all GPUs, and both parts sit at the 50th percentile. That shared percentile is meaningful in a narrow sense: neither part is recorded as an outlier in either direction. The average benchmark score for both is zero, which confirms no aggregate performance data has been logged for either product. Without measured frame rates, compute scores, or synthetic benchmarks, the quantitative comparison is limited to the physical and architectural parameters that are recorded.

The most striking difference in the raw data is compute throughput. The AMD part lists FP32 performance at 10.65 TFLOPS, while the Intel part lists FP32 at 819.2 GFLOPS. That is a 13x difference in raw floating-point throughput. The database records the AMD part's FP16 at 10.65 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning FP16 and FP32 run at the same rate. The Intel part records FP16 at 1.638 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, indicating FP16 runs at half the rate of FP32. In every compute metric recorded, the AMD part holds a substantial lead.

Memory bandwidth tells a similar story. The Radeon RX 9050 has 288.0 GB/s of dedicated bandwidth from 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile uses system shared memory, with bandwidth recorded as "System Dependent." The database does not assign a fixed number to the Intel part's bandwidth because it depends on the host platform's memory configuration. The AMD part's fixed 288.0 GB/s is a concrete figure, while the Intel part's effective bandwidth is variable and platform-bound.

Pixel and texture throughput follow the same pattern. The AMD part records 166.4 GPixel/s and 166.4 GTexel/s. The Intel part records 12.80 GPixel/s and 25.60 GTexel/s. The pixel rate difference is roughly 13x, and the texture rate difference is roughly 6.5x. These are the only throughput metrics available, and they all favor the AMD part by wide margins.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 9050 wins in every recorded performance-related metric. It has 1024 shading units versus 256, 64 texture mapping units versus 16, and 64 ROPs versus 8. It also lists 16 ray tracing cores, while the Intel part lists none. The AMD part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both list OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, so those API levels are a tie.

The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile wins in categories that are not about raw performance. Its 15 W TDP is dramatically lower than the AMD part's 92 W. It is an integrated graphics processor with a Ring Bus interface, meaning it requires no separate power connectors and no dedicated power supply recommendation. The AMD part is a dual-slot discrete card with a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, one 8-pin power connector, and a suggested 250 W power supply. For systems where power draw and physical footprint are the primary constraints, the Intel part is the only one of the two that fits.

The Intel part also has a release date advantage in the database: it was released on 2023-01-03, while the AMD part is dated 2026-07-27. The Intel part has a recorded successor, Arc Graphics-M, while the AMD part has no successor listed. The AMD part's predecessor is Navi III, and the Intel part has no predecessor listed.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 records 10.65 TFLOPS FP32, compared to 819.2 GFLOPS for the Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile. The AMD part is roughly 13x higher in this metric.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent.

Q: Do both GPUs support ray tracing?

A: No. The AMD Radeon RX 9050 lists 16 ray tracing cores. The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile lists no ray tracing cores in the database.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 has a 92 W TDP, while the Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile has a 15 W TDP. The AMD part requires an 8-pin power connector and a suggested 250 W power supply, while the Intel part is an IGP with no power connector listed.

Q: Which GPU supports newer DirectX features?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Are there any recorded benchmark scores for either GPU?

A: No. The database lists zero benchmark entries and an average benchmark score of zero for both parts. Both are recorded at the 50th percentile among all GPUs.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon RX 9050 | Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 4.0 | Generation 12.2 |

| Process node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 10 nm (Intel) |

| Transistors | 29,700 million | Not recorded |

| Die size | 199 mm² | Not recorded |

| Transistor density | 149.2M / mm² | Not recorded |

| Base clock | 1330 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2600 MHz | 1600 MHz |

| Game clock | 1920 MHz | Not recorded |

| Memory clock | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective | System Shared |

| Memory size | 8 GB GDDR6 | System Shared |

| Memory bus | 128 bit | System Shared |

| Memory bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading units | 1024 | 256 |

| TMUs | 64 | 16 |

| ROPs | 64 | 8 |

| RT cores | 16 | Not recorded |

| Pixel rate | 166.4 GPixel/s | 12.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 166.4 GTexel/s | 25.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 10.65 TFLOPS | 819.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 10.65 TFLOPS (1:1) | 1.638 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 92 W | 15 W |

| Slot width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power connectors | 1x 8-pin | None listed |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | None listed |

| Bus interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | Ring Bus |

| Display outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Release date | 2026-07-27 | 2023-01-03 |

| Predecessor | Navi III | None listed |

| Successor | None listed | Arc Graphics-M |

Architecture Differences

The two parts come from different foundries and process nodes. The AMD Radeon RX 9050 uses a 4 nm TSMC process with 29,700 million transistors on a 199 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 149.2M per mm². The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile uses a 10 nm Intel process, and the database records no transistor count, die size, or density for it.

The AMD chip is Navi 44, built on RDNA 4.0, and belongs to the Navi IV (RX 9000) generation. The Intel chip is Raptor Lake, built on Generation 12.2 architecture, and belongs to the HD Graphics-M generation. The AMD part's predecessor is Navi III, while the Intel part has no predecessor listed but does have a successor: Arc Graphics-M.

The memory architecture is fundamentally different. The AMD part has dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and fixed 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part relies on system shared memory, with no dedicated memory size, type, bus width, or bandwidth figure. Its memory clock is also listed as system shared. This means the Intel part's memory performance is entirely dependent on the host system's RAM configuration, while the AMD part has a fixed, dedicated memory subsystem.

The compute architecture also differs in ratio behavior. The AMD part runs FP16 and FP32 at the same rate (1:1), which is typical for RDNA 4.0. The Intel part runs FP16 at half the FP32 rate (2:1), which is typical for Generation 12.2 integrated graphics. The AMD part also adds 16 ray tracing cores, a feature the Intel part does not list.

The physical design differs completely. The AMD part is a dual-slot discrete card requiring an 8-pin power connector and a 250 W suggested power supply. The Intel part is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface, no power connectors, and no suggested power supply. The AMD part uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Intel part uses the Ring Bus interconnect found in integrated processors. Display outputs on the AMD part are fixed: one HDMI 2.1b and two DisplayPort 2.1a. The Intel part's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

The TDP difference is stark: 92 W for the AMD part versus 15 W for the Intel part. That 77 W gap reflects the difference between a discrete, actively cooled card and an integrated graphics block sharing a processor's thermal budget.

The Verdict

The data points to two different classes of hardware. The AMD Radeon RX 9050 is a discrete graphics card with dedicated memory, 1024 shading units, 16 ray tracing cores, and a 92 W TDP. The Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile is an integrated processor with 256 shading units, no ray tracing cores, system shared memory, and a 15 W TDP. Every recorded compute, memory, and throughput metric favors the AMD part, often by an order of magnitude.

The Intel part's advantages are not in performance. It consumes far less power, requires no additional power supply, takes no expansion slot, and was released earlier in the database timeline. It is the only option for systems that cannot accommodate a discrete card. The AMD part requires a dual-slot footprint, an 8-pin connector, and a suggested 250 W power supply.

The database records no benchmark scores for either part, so the verdict rests on specifications and architecture. For workloads that stress FP32 compute, texture throughput, pixel fill, or ray tracing, the recorded data gives the AMD part the clear lead. For low-power integrated systems, the Intel part is the only recorded fit. Neither part has measured benchmark data to confirm real-world performance, and both sit at the same 50th percentile in the database, so the specification gap is the only available evidence for a decision.