AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU vs Intel Arc Graphics 32EU Comparison

The Verdict

The data shows two fundamentally different integrated graphics solutions. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU, built on the 7 nm process with RDNA 2.0 architecture, delivers significantly higher compute throughput, memory bandwidth, and pixel processing capability. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU, fabricated on a 3 nm process with Xe-LPG architecture, operates within a higher 65 W TDP but offers lower raw graphics performance metrics.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU is the choice for workloads that demand raw graphics throughput. Its FP32 compute of 1.638 TFLOPS is 64% higher than the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU's 998.4 GFLOPS. The AMD solution also provides 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to the Intel part's system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU sits at the 3rd percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU holds the 50th percentile, a substantial positioning gap.

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU does hold advantages in specific areas. Its boost clock reaches 1950 MHz versus 1600 MHz on the AMD part, and it uses a more advanced 3 nm process node. Its transistor count of 17,800 million dwarfs the AMD's 2,400 million, and its die size of 243 mm² is larger than the 163 mm² AMD die. The Intel part also has a higher transistor density at 73.3M per mm² versus 14.7M per mm². However, these architectural advantages do not translate into higher benchmark scores, as the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU's recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733 places it near the bottom of the database distribution.

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU compare to the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU in raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU delivers 1.638 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 64% higher than the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU's 998.4 GFLOPS. In FP16 compute, the AMD part reaches 3.277 TFLOPS versus 1.997 TFLOPS on the Intel solution.

Q: What memory configurations do these two GPUs use?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, meaning its memory performance relies entirely on the host system configuration.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel and texture throughput?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU achieves 25.60 GPixel/s pixel rate and 51.20 GTexel/s texture rate. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU records 15.60 GPixel/s and 31.20 GTexel/s respectively, giving AMD a 64% advantage in both metrics.

Q: How do their power envelopes differ?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU operates at a 15 W TDP, while the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU has a 65 W TDP. The Intel part consumes over four times the power budget despite delivering lower compute performance.

Q: What do the benchmark percentile rankings indicate?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU is positioned at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU sits at the 3rd percentile, with its 733 average benchmark score matching the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU and 64EU exactly, and trailing the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M by 2.4%.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part also includes 8 ray tracing cores, while the Intel datasheet records no RT cores.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture using the Van Gogh chip, produced on TSMC's 7 nm process. It contains 2,400 million transistors on a 163 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 14.7M per mm². The architecture incorporates 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 ROPs, and 8 dedicated ray tracing cores. This configuration is designed as a console-class GPU with a 15 W TDP, and its display output is limited to a single USB Type-C connector.

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses the Xe-LPG architecture on the Arrow Lake-S chip, fabricated on TSMC's 3 nm process. This design packs 17,800 million transistors into a 243 mm² die, achieving a much higher density of 73.3M per mm². The GPU has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores listed in the database. It operates as an integrated graphics processor (IGP) on a Ring Bus interface, with its display outputs dependent on the motherboard implementation.

The architectural philosophies differ markedly. AMD concentrates on a compact, power-efficient design with dedicated memory and ray tracing support. Intel scales up transistor count on a leading-edge process but relies on system-shared memory and motherboard-dependent output paths. The Intel part's predecessor is listed as HD Graphics-M, indicating a lineage from Intel's integrated graphics line, while the AMD part has no predecessor recorded.

Specification Differences

The process nodes differ: AMD uses 7 nm TSMC, Intel uses 3 nm TSMC. The AMD chip contains 2,400 million transistors versus 17,800 million on Intel, with die sizes of 163 mm² and 243 mm² respectively. Transistor density is 14.7M per mm² on AMD and 73.3M per mm² on Intel.

Clock speeds show AMD at 1000 MHz base and 1600 MHz boost, while Intel runs at 300 MHz base and 1950 MHz boost. The AMD memory clock is 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective transfer, while Intel's memory clock is listed as system shared.

Memory configuration differs fundamentally: AMD provides 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The AMD GPU has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Intel GPU has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. AMD includes 8 ray tracing cores; Intel lists none.

Pixel rate is 25.60 GPixel/s on AMD versus 15.60 GPixel/s on Intel. Texture rate is 51.20 GTexel/s versus 31.20 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 1.638 TFLOPS versus 998.4 GFLOPS, and FP16 is 3.277 TFLOPS versus 1.997 TFLOPS. TDP is 15 W for AMD and 65 W for Intel. The Intel part is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface, while the AMD part has no bus interface listed. Display outputs are 1x USB Type-C on AMD versus motherboard-dependent on Intel. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD GPU released on 2024-12-31, while Intel's released on 2024-10-23.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU and the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU. The AMD part has no benchmark entries and no nearest rivals listed. The Intel part has a single recorded benchmark: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 with a score of 733.

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU's score of 733 places it in a tight cluster with its nearest rivals. It scores exactly equal to the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU and the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU, both at 733. It is 1.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 6470M, which scores 723, and 2.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M, which scores 751. This cluster of scores within a 3.9% range indicates that the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU delivers performance comparable to decade-old discrete mobile GPUs.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU's specifications suggest substantially higher performance than the Intel part across every measured graphics metric. Its FP32 throughput of 1.638 TFLOPS is 64% higher. Its pixel rate of 25.60 GPixel/s is 64% higher. Its texture rate of 51.20 GTexel/s is 64% higher. Its memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s from dedicated LPDDR5 memory contrasts sharply with the Intel part's system-shared configuration, which cannot guarantee any specific bandwidth level.

The percentile rankings reinforce this gap. The AMD GPU sits at the 50th percentile, the median of all GPUs in the database. The Intel GPU sits at the 3rd percentile, meaning 97% of recorded GPUs outperform it. Even with its higher boost clock of 1950 MHz and advanced 3 nm process, the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU cannot overcome its reduced shader count, lower texture and pixel throughput, and shared memory architecture.

The absence of benchmark data for the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU means its performance must be inferred from its specification sheet. The recorded data shows the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU at the 3rd percentile with a 733 benchmark score, while the AMD part's 50th percentile ranking and superior compute metrics indicate a much stronger position in the performance hierarchy. The 15 W TDP of the AMD part, combined with its dedicated 16 GB memory pool and ray tracing hardware, presents a more capable graphics solution on paper. The Intel part's 65 W TDP and system-shared memory architecture limit its utility despite the manufacturing advantages of the 3 nm node.