AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU vs Intel Arc A380E x2 Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents two fundamentally different devices that share the same percentile ranking. Both the AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU and the Intel Arc A380E x2 sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 0 recorded for each. The absence of head-to-head benchmark entries means the recorded data does not establish a performance hierarchy between them through direct measurement.

The AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU is a 30 W integrated-class solution with 256 shading units and a 64-bit memory bus. The Intel Arc A380E x2 is a 130 W discrete card with 1024 shading units, a 96-bit bus, and eight display outputs. For workloads that demand raw throughput, the Intel part has the architectural advantage on paper. For power-constrained embedded or mobile deployments, the AMD part uses a fraction of the power budget.

The Intel device is marked as end-of-life, while the AMD device remains active in production. The Intel card carries an explicit suggested PSU of 300 W, a single 6-pin connector, and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The AMD device lists no power connectors and no bus interface, reinforcing its role as a low-power integrated processor. Users selecting a long-lived production component will find the AMD part still active; those needing multi-display output from a discrete card will find the Intel part offers eight mini-DisplayPort 2.0 connections.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different architectural families and different process nodes. The AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU uses the Phoenix chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the DG2-128 chip built on Xe-HPG architecture under the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation, fabricated on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC.

Transistor counts differ substantially. The AMD chip contains 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 142.6 million per mm². The Intel chip contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding 45.9 million per mm². The AMD die is larger by 21 mm², but packs over three and a half times the transistor count into that space.

Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither lists tensor cores. Both list RT cores, but with different counts: the AMD part has 4, the Intel part has 8. The AMD part does not expose any display outputs, while the Intel part offers 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0. The AMD device is 280 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 21 mm wide. The Intel device is 265 mm long, 127 mm tall, and 20 mm wide. Both are similar in physical footprint, though the Intel card is single-slot while the AMD device omits slot width entirely.

The Intel part lists a predecessor (Xe Graphics) and a successor (Battlemage), marking it as a discrete generation within Intel's roadmap. The AMD part lists no predecessor or successor, and its generation field simply reads "Console GPU (AMD)". The AMD part launched on 2023-09-17, the Intel part on 2024-03-31.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and neither device records any individual benchmark entries. The wins counter shows 0 for both sides. This means the database holds no measured comparison points between the AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU and the Intel Arc A380E x2.

What the recorded data does provide are raw specification-derived throughput figures. The Intel part reaches 4.096 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD part reaches 2.560 TFLOPS FP32. That places the Intel part 60% ahead in FP32 throughput. FP16 numbers follow the same pattern: 8.192 TFLOPS for Intel versus 5.120 TFLOPS for AMD, a 60% advantage again, with both using a 2:1 ratio.

Pixel throughput favors Intel heavily. The Intel part delivers 64.00 GPixel/s against 20.00 GPixel/s for AMD, a 220% advantage. Texture rate shows 128.0 GTexel/s for Intel versus 40.00 GTexel/s for AMD, a 220% advantage as well. These figures align with the resource counts: Intel has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while AMD has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs.

Memory bandwidth flips the narrative. The Intel part uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus at 15.5 Gbps effective, delivering 186.0 GB/s. The AMD part uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 64-bit bus at 6.4 Gbps effective, delivering 51.20 GB/s. Intel has 263% more bandwidth. AMD has 10 GB more capacity.

Clock behavior differs in character. The AMD part has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, a 1000 MHz spread. The Intel part runs flat at 2000 MHz for both base and boost. The AMD memory clock is listed at 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective; the Intel memory clock is 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute, and by how much?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 delivers 4.096 TFLOPS FP32, which is 60% higher than the AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU's 2.560 TFLOPS.

Q: How much memory does each GPU carry, and what type?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 64-bit bus. The Intel Arc A380E x2 has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU supports more display outputs?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 lists 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU lists no outputs at all.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU has a TDP of 30 W and lists no power connectors. The Intel Arc A380E x2 has a TDP of 130 W, requires a single 6-pin connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU is listed as active. The Intel Arc A380E x2 is listed as end-of-life, with a predecessor named Xe Graphics and a successor named Battlemage.

Q: Do both support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes. Both list DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both also include RT cores, with Intel listing 8 and AMD listing 4.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380E x2 wins on every raw throughput metric recorded. FP32 compute is 60% higher. Pixel rate is 220% higher at 64.00 GPixel/s versus 20.00 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 220% higher at 128.0 GTexel/s versus 40.00 GTexel/s. Memory bandwidth is 263% higher at 186.0 GB/s versus 51.20 GB/s. The Intel part also has twice the RT cores, four times the shading units, four times the TMUs, and four times the ROPs. For any workload that stresses fill rate, texture fetch, or compute throughput, the Intel part is the stronger choice based on the recorded specifications.

The AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU wins on efficiency and capacity. TDP is 30 W versus 130 W, a difference of 100 W. Memory capacity is 16 GB versus 6 GB, a difference of 10 GB. The AMD part uses no power connectors, while the Intel part needs a 6-pin connector and a 300 W suggested PSU. The AMD part is built on a 4 nm process with a transistor density of 142.6 million per mm², versus 45.9 million per mm² for Intel. For deployments where power delivery is limited, where board space for connectors is unavailable, or where larger memory capacity matters more than bandwidth, the AMD part has the clear advantage.

The transistor efficiency gap is striking. The AMD die carries 25,390 million transistors at 178 mm², while the Intel die carries 7,200 million transistors at 157 mm². Despite the Intel part having more shading units, TMUs, and ROPs, the AMD die packs more than three times the transistor density. The data suggests the AMD design concentrates resources into a compact, low-power package, while the Intel design spreads fewer transistors across a similar area to drive higher clock-independent throughput.

The production status also splits the use cases. The AMD part remains active, suitable for ongoing designs. The Intel part is end-of-life, which limits its viability for new long-horizon projects. The Intel part's eight display outputs make it suited for multi-screen installations, but only while inventory lasts.

Specification Differences

The two devices differ across nearly every recorded field.

Process node: AMD uses 4 nm, Intel uses 6 nm. Both use TSMC as foundry.

Transistors: AMD has 25,390 million, Intel has 7,200 million. Die size: AMD is 178 mm², Intel is 157 mm². Transistor density: AMD is 142.6 million per mm², Intel is 45.9 million per mm².

Clocks: AMD base is 1500 MHz, boost is 2500 MHz. Intel base and boost are both 2000 MHz. Memory clock: AMD is 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective, Intel is 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective.

Memory: AMD has 16 GB LPDDR5 on a 64-bit bus with 51.20 GB/s bandwidth. Intel has 6 GB GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute resources: AMD has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 RT cores. Intel has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 RT cores.

Throughput: AMD pixel rate is 20.00 GPixel/s, texture rate is 40.00 GTexel/s, FP32 is 2.560 TFLOPS, FP16 is 5.120 TFLOPS. Intel pixel rate is 64.00 GPixel/s, texture rate is 128.0 GTexel/s, FP32 is 4.096 TFLOPS, FP16 is 8.192 TFLOPS.

Power and cooling: AMD TDP is 30 W with no power connectors. Intel TDP is 130 W with a single 6-pin connector and a 300 W suggested PSU.

Board features: AMD lists no slot width, no bus interface, and no display outputs. Intel is single-slot, uses PCIe 4.0 x8, and provides 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0.

Dimensions: AMD is 280 mm by 111 mm by 21 mm. Intel is 265 mm by 127 mm by 20 mm.

Lifecycle: AMD launched 2023-09-17 and is active. Intel launched 2024-03-31 and is end-of-life, with predecessor Xe Graphics and successor Battlemage. AMD lists a launch MSRP of 599 USD. Intel lists no launch MSRP.