AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU vs Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architecture differences between the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU and the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture on TSMC's 7 nm process, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile uses Xe-LPG on Intel's 10 nm process. The AMD chip is named Van Gogh and belongs to the Console GPU (AMD) generation, whereas the Intel part is based on the Meteor Lake chip in the Arc Graphics-M generation.

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare between the two GPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has 512 shading units, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has 384 shading units. This gives AMD a 33% advantage in raw shading unit count, which directly influences its higher FP32 throughput.

Q: What are the FP32 performance figures for each GPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU delivers 1.638 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile delivers 1,382.4 GFLOPS (approximately 1.382 TFLOPS). The AMD part is about 18.5% ahead in single-precision floating-point throughput.

Q: How does memory configuration differ between the two products?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile uses System Shared memory, meaning its capacity, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all system dependent rather than fixed specifications.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each GPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has a TDP of 15 W, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has a TDP of 28 W. Despite the higher power envelope, the Intel part does not surpass the AMD part in most measured throughput metrics.

Q: Which API levels does each GPU support?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part supports a higher DirectX feature level.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU and Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile represent two distinct design philosophies within the integrated and mobile graphics space. The AMD part is built on TSMC's 7 nm process and uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture, a design derived from console-class GPUs. The chip, codenamed Van Gogh, contains 2,400 million transistors within a 163 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 14.7M per mm². In contrast, the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile uses Intel's 10 nm process with the Xe-LPG architecture, based on the Meteor Lake chip. The Intel part does not have recorded transistor count, die size, or transistor density data in the database.

The compute core configurations differ substantially. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU packs 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. It also includes 8 dedicated ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units, with no dedicated ray tracing cores listed. This structural difference means the AMD part has a 33% advantage in shading units, a 33% advantage in TMUs, and a 100% advantage in ROPs.

Clock behavior also differs. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1600 MHz. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile starts at a much lower 300 MHz base clock but boosts to 1800 MHz, which is 200 MHz higher than the AMD part's boost. The Intel part's memory clock is listed as "System Shared," with no fixed frequency, whereas the AMD part runs its LPDDR5 memory at 800 MHz, translating to 6.4 Gbps effective.

The memory subsystem is a fundamental architectural split. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory across a 128-bit bus, providing 102.4 GB/s of fixed bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile relies entirely on system shared memory, meaning its bandwidth and capacity vary with the host platform. This makes the AMD part's memory performance predictable and consistent, while the Intel part's memory behavior is environment dependent.

The bus interface also reflects different integration strategies. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile uses a Ring Bus interface and is classified as an IGP, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU does not have a recorded bus interface. Display outputs differ as well: the AMD part has a single USB Type-C output, while the Intel part's display outputs are portable device dependent.

Both GPUs are listed as Active in production status. The Intel part was released on 2023-12-13 with a predecessor of HD Graphics-M, while the AMD part has a release date of 2024-12-31 and no recorded predecessor or successor. The AMD part belongs to the Console GPU generation, suggesting design heritage from gaming-focused silicon, while the Intel part belongs to the Arc Graphics-M generation for Meteor Lake mobile platforms.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU and the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile. Neither product has an average benchmark score recorded, and both sit at the 50th percentile versus all GPUs in the database. The wins count is zero for both sides, and the nearest rivals list is empty for each part.

Despite the absence of direct benchmark scores, the specification-derived throughput metrics provide a clear comparative picture. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU achieves a pixel rate of 25.60 GPixel/s, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile reaches 14.40 GPixel/s. This represents a 77.8% advantage for the AMD part in pixel fill rate, a critical metric for rasterization workloads. The texture rate follows a similar pattern: the AMD part delivers 51.20 GTexel/s versus 43.20 GTexel/s for the Intel part, a 18.5% lead for AMD.

The FP32 compute figures reinforce the AMD advantage. The Ryzen Z2 A GPU delivers 1.638 TFLOPS, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile delivers 1,382.4 GFLOPS. This puts the AMD part 18.5% ahead in single-precision compute. The FP16 figures show a narrower gap: the AMD part delivers 3.277 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 2.765 TFLOPS (2:1) for the Intel part, an 18.5% advantage again, reflecting the same ratio as FP32.

Clock speed analysis reveals an interesting nuance. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has a higher boost clock at 1800 MHz compared to the AMD part's 1600 MHz. However, this 12.5% boost clock advantage does not translate into throughput leadership because the AMD part's larger core configuration (512 shading units versus 384) compensates. The AMD part also has a base clock of 1000 MHz, which is more than three times higher than the Intel part's 300 MHz base clock, suggesting the Intel part relies more heavily on boost behavior for performance.

The memory bandwidth comparison is not directly quantifiable because the Intel part uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. However, the AMD part's fixed 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth provides a known quantity that software can rely upon. The Intel part's bandwidth will vary based on the host memory configuration, which introduces uncertainty into performance consistency.

The DirectX feature level difference is notable. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The 12_2 feature level includes additional capabilities such as mesh shaders and variable rate shading, which are required for certain modern game features. Both parts support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, so those API paths are equivalent.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The manufacturing process differs: the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses 7 nm from TSMC, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile uses 10 nm from Intel. The AMD part has a recorded die size of 163 mm² and a transistor count of 2,400 million, while the Intel part has neither recorded. Transistor density is similarly only recorded for the AMD part at 14.7M per mm².

Core counts differ in all three categories. The AMD part has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the Intel part has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The AMD part also has 8 ray tracing cores, while the Intel part has none recorded. Clock specifications show the AMD part with a 1000 MHz base and 1600 MHz boost, while the Intel part has a 300 MHz base and 1800 MHz boost. The AMD part has a fixed memory clock of 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective), while the Intel part lists memory clock as system shared.

Memory configuration is another major differentiator. The AMD part has 16 GB of LPDDR5 with a 128-bit bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part uses system shared memory for capacity, type, bus width, and bandwidth, all of which are system dependent. The pixel rate differs (25.60 GPixel/s for AMD versus 14.40 GPixel/s for Intel), as does the texture rate (51.20 GTexel/s versus 43.20 GTexel/s). FP32 performance is 1.638 TFLOPS for AMD versus 1,382.4 GFLOPS for Intel, and FP16 is 3.277 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 2.765 TFLOPS (2:1).

TDP is another clear split: the AMD part draws 15 W, while the Intel part draws 28 W, an 86.7% higher power envelope for the Intel part. The Intel part is classified as an IGP with a Ring Bus interface, while the AMD part has no recorded slot width or bus interface. Display outputs differ: the AMD part has 1x USB Type-C, while the Intel part has portable device dependent outputs. The AMD part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Release dates differ by about one year: the Intel part released on 2023-12-13, and the AMD part released on 2024-12-31. The Intel part has a recorded predecessor (HD Graphics-M), while the AMD part has none. Neither part has a recorded successor or launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU wins in all measured throughput categories. Its pixel rate of 25.60 GPixel/s is 77.8% higher than the Intel part's 14.40 GPixel/s, making it the stronger choice for fill-rate-bound workloads such as high-resolution rendering with heavy overdraw. Its texture rate of 51.20 GTexel/s is 18.5% higher than the Intel part's 43.20 GTexel/s, favoring texture-heavy scenes and anisotropic filtering tasks. The FP32 throughput of 1.638 TFLOPS versus 1,382.4 GFLOPS gives it an 18.5% advantage in general compute workloads, including physics simulations and compute shaders.

The AMD part's 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth provides a predictable memory environment. This benefits workloads that require consistent bandwidth, such as frame buffering at high resolutions or large texture streaming. The 128-bit bus width also supports higher sustained memory throughput compared to a system shared configuration, which may be constrained by the host memory controller.

The AMD part's 8 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced effects, a capability the Intel part does not list. Combined with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support, the AMD part can access the full set of modern rendering features, including mesh shaders and variable rate shading. This makes it the more capable option for games that leverage these APIs.

The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile wins in boost clock speed, reaching 1800 MHz versus the AMD part's 1600 MHz. This higher boost clock can translate to better performance in lightly threaded or bursty workloads that scale with clock frequency rather than core count. However, the Intel part's lower base clock of 300 MHz suggests it may spend more time at lower frequencies under sustained load.

The Intel part also has a higher TDP at 28 W versus 15 W for the AMD part. While this is not a performance win, it indicates the Intel part is designed for a different power envelope, potentially in larger mobile devices with more thermal headroom. The Intel part's system shared memory model could be an advantage in systems where unified memory access patterns reduce data copying overhead, though this advantage is platform dependent.

The Intel part's predecessor, HD Graphics-M, indicates a lineage in integrated graphics, and its classification as an IGP with a Ring Bus interface suggests tight integration with the host processor. This may benefit systems where low latency access to system memory is more important than raw bandwidth.

The Verdict

The recorded data consistently favors the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU across compute, rasterization, and memory specifications. The AMD part leads in pixel rate by 77.8%, in texture rate by 18.5%, and in FP32 throughput by 18.5%. It also provides dedicated ray tracing hardware, 16 GB of fixed LPDDR5 memory, and DirectX 12 Ultimate support. These advantages come within a 15 W TDP, which is 13 W lower than the Intel part's 28 W envelope.

The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile offers a higher boost clock at 1800 MHz and a system shared memory model that may simplify platform integration. Its 384 shading units and 24 TMUs are fewer than the AMD part's 512 and 32, respectively, and its 8 ROPs are half of the AMD part's 16. The Intel part's DirectX 12 (12_1) support is one feature level below the AMD part's 12_2.

For applications that depend on raw fill rate, texture throughput, or FP32 compute, the data points to the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU as the stronger choice. Its dedicated memory subsystem and ray tracing cores add further capability. The Intel part's higher boost clock may provide some advantage in specific scenarios, but the specification data does not show any category where it leads in throughput.

Both parts sit at the 50th percentile versus all GPUs in the database, with no average benchmark scores recorded. The absence of direct benchmark entries means the verdict rests on specification-derived performance indicators. Those indicators uniformly favor the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU for graphics-intensive workloads, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile presents a viable option for platforms requiring an integrated GPU with a high boost clock and system shared memory flexibility.