AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU vs Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU versus the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile. Both entries list an average benchmark score of zero and a percentile rank of 50 among all GPUs in the database. With no raw performance measurements, wins and losses cannot be assigned. The comparison must therefore rest entirely on the architectural and specification data recorded for each part.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU operates with a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1600 MHz. Its fixed-function throughput is measured at 25.60 GPixel/s for pixel rate and 51.20 GTexel/s for texture rate. Floating-point performance reaches 1.638 TFLOPS in FP32 and 3.277 TFLOPS in FP16 using a 2:1 ratio.

The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile runs with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2300 MHz. Its pixel rate is recorded at 36.80 GPixel/s, which is 43.8% higher than the AMD part. Texture rate stands at 73.60 GTexel/s, a 43.8% advantage over the Ryzen Z2 A GPU. FP32 throughput is 2.355 TFLOPS, which is 43.8% above the AMD figure. FP16 output is 4.710 TFLOPS, again a 43.8% lead.

Those percentage differences are consistent across all throughput metrics, which indicates the Intel part achieves its advantage purely through clock speed. Both GPUs share identical shading unit counts, texture mapping unit counts, and render output unit counts. Each has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Intel part clocks substantially higher at boost, and that directly translates into higher fill rates and compute throughput.

The AMD part does have a notable clock advantage at base frequency. Its 1000 MHz base clock is more than three times the Intel base of 300 MHz. However, the Intel part boosts to 2300 MHz, which is 43.8% higher than the AMD boost of 1600 MHz. In sustained workloads where boost clocks apply, the Intel part holds the throughput lead. In idle or lightly loaded states where base clocks dominate, the AMD part runs at a much higher frequency.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile records 2.355 TFLOPS in FP32 and 4.710 TFLOPS in FP16, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU records 1.638 TFLOPS in FP32 and 3.277 TFLOPS in FP16. The Intel part leads by 43.8% in each case.

Q: Are the two GPUs based on the same architecture?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses RDNA 2.0 architecture on a 7 nm process from TSMC. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses Xe3-LPG architecture on a 3 nm process from Intel.

Q: How do their memory configurations differ?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has 8 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has 4 ray tracing cores.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

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

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has a TDP of 15 W. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has a TDP of 25 W.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile wins on every measured throughput metric. Its pixel rate of 36.80 GPixel/s exceeds the AMD part's 25.60 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 73.60 GTexel/s exceeds 51.20 GTexel/s. Its FP32 output of 2.355 TFLOPS exceeds 1.638 TFLOPS, and its FP16 output of 4.710 TFLOPS exceeds 3.277 TFLOPS. The Intel part also boosts to 2300 MHz, which is 700 MHz higher than the AMD boost clock.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. It carries 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth on a 128-bit bus. The Intel part relies on system shared memory, so its bandwidth is system dependent and cannot be compared directly. The AMD part also has double the ray tracing cores: 8 versus 4.

The AMD part also runs at a much higher base clock. Its 1000 MHz base frequency versus 300 MHz for Intel means the AMD GPU operates at higher clocks in low-load states. This could translate into more consistent performance in scenarios where the Intel part stays near its base clock rather than boosting.

The AMD part has a lower TDP at 15 W versus 25 W for Intel. That difference suggests the AMD GPU is suited to more power-constrained environments. The Intel part's higher TDP aligns with its higher boost clock and higher throughput.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every core specification except for the counts of shading units, TMUs, and ROPs. Both have 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs.

Clock speeds differ substantially. AMD records a base clock of 1000 MHz and boost of 1600 MHz. Intel records a base clock of 300 MHz and boost of 2300 MHz.

Memory differs entirely. AMD has 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. Intel has system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Ray tracing core counts differ. AMD has 8, Intel has 4.

Throughput rates differ. AMD records 25.60 GPixel/s and 51.20 GTexel/s. Intel records 36.80 GPixel/s and 73.60 GTexel/s.

Compute figures differ. AMD records 1.638 TFLOPS FP32 and 3.277 TFLOPS FP16. Intel records 2.355 TFLOPS FP32 and 4.710 TFLOPS FP16.

Power differs. AMD has a TDP of 15 W. Intel has a TDP of 25 W.

Process technology differs. AMD uses a 7 nm process from TSMC. Intel uses a 3 nm process from Intel.

Chip and architecture differ. AMD uses the Van Gogh chip with RDNA 2.0. Intel uses the Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG.

Physical integration differs. Intel is an IGP with no power connectors and a bus interface of IGP. AMD has no recorded slot width, power connectors, or bus interface.

Display outputs differ. AMD has 1x USB Type-C. Intel has portable device dependent outputs.

Transistor count and die size are only recorded for AMD: 2,400 million transistors on a 163 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 14.7M per mm². Intel's transistor count and die size are unknown.

Release dates differ. AMD was released on 2024-12-31. Intel was released on 2026-01-26.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses RDNA 2.0 architecture on the Van Gogh chip. It belongs to the Console GPU generation for AMD. The process node is 7 nm from TSMC. The die contains 2,400 million transistors across 163 mm², yielding a transistor density of 14.7M per mm².

The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses Xe3-LPG architecture on the Panther Lake chip. It belongs to the Arc Graphics-M generation for Panther Lake. The process node is 3 nm from Intel. Transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

Both GPUs implement the same API set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both have 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The key architectural difference is the ray tracing core count. AMD integrates 8 ray tracing cores, while Intel integrates 4.

The clock behavior differs significantly. AMD's base clock of 1000 MHz is high relative to its boost of 1600 MHz. Intel's base clock of 300 MHz is very low relative to its boost of 2300 MHz. This suggests different power management philosophies. AMD runs closer to a steady state, while Intel relies on aggressive boosting.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. AMD uses dedicated LPDDR5 memory with fixed bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. Intel uses system shared memory, meaning its bandwidth and capacity depend on the host platform. The database records Intel's bandwidth as system dependent.

The process node difference is notable. Intel's 3 nm process is more advanced than AMD's 7 nm process. This likely contributes to the Intel part's ability to reach a boost clock of 2300 MHz while maintaining a 25 W TDP. AMD's 7 nm process supports a 1600 MHz boost at 15 W.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear throughput winner. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile outperforms the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU by 43.8% in pixel rate, texture rate, FP32 compute, and FP16 compute. Its boost clock of 2300 MHz is 43.8% higher than the AMD boost of 1600 MHz. For any workload that is bound by fill rate or raw floating-point throughput, the Intel part is the stronger option.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU holds advantages in memory and ray tracing. Its 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth provides a fixed, predictable memory subsystem. The Intel part depends on system shared memory, which introduces variability based on the host system. The AMD part also has 8 ray tracing cores versus 4 for Intel, which could matter in ray tracing workloads.

The power envelope differs. AMD runs at 15 W TDP, Intel at 25 W TDP. The Intel part consumes 66.7% more power while delivering 43.8% more throughput. The efficiency ratio favors AMD on a per-watt basis.

The AMD part has a much higher base clock at 1000 MHz versus 300 MHz. This suggests the AMD GPU maintains higher performance in steady-state or thermally constrained conditions where boost clocks cannot be sustained. The Intel part relies on reaching its 2300 MHz boost to deliver its best results.

The process technology gap is significant. Intel uses a 3 nm process from its own foundry, while AMD uses 7 nm from TSMC. The smaller process node enables the higher boost clock and likely explains the throughput advantage.

For users who prioritize maximum throughput in a mobile or integrated context, the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is the data-supported choice. It wins every recorded performance metric.

For users who need dedicated memory capacity, higher ray tracing core count, or lower power consumption, the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU is the data-supported choice. Its 16 GB dedicated LPDDR5 memory and 8 ray tracing cores provide capabilities the Intel part does not match.

The release timeline also matters. AMD launched on 2024-12-31, while Intel launched on 2026-01-26. The Intel part is over a year newer, which aligns with its more advanced process node and higher performance metrics.