AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU vs Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data separates these two GPUs cleanly by workload class. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU is a low-power console-class part built around a 15 W design envelope, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 is a 300 W accelerator aimed at compute-heavy data center tasks. Neither part has benchmark scores entered in the database, so the comparison rests on architectural capacity, memory subsystem, and feature support.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU wins in scenarios that demand a compact, low-power graphics solution with display output. It carries 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory on a 128 bit bus, delivers 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, and includes a USB Type-C display output. Its 15 W TDP means it can operate in systems with minimal cooling and power delivery, making it suitable for portable or embedded form factors. The part also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which gives it broader API coverage than the Intel part in graphics-oriented workloads. Rasterization throughput is present but modest: 25.60 GPixel/s pixel rate and 51.20 GTexel/s texture rate.

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 wins in raw compute throughput and memory capacity. Its 22.22 TFLOPS FP32 figure is over 13 times the AMD part's 1.638 TFLOPS. FP16 performance is also 22.22 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, compared to the AMD part's 3.277 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. The Intel part's 48 GB of HBM2e memory on an 8192 bit bus delivers 1.23 TB/s of bandwidth, roughly 12 times the AMD part's 102.4 GB/s. Texture rate is 694.4 GTexel/s, which is more than 13 times the AMD part's 51.20 GTexel/s. The Intel part also has 56 ray tracing cores versus 8 on the AMD part, and 7168 shading units versus 512. These figures point to a device built for large data sets, dense compute, and sustained throughput, not for driving a display.

The database shows no head-to-head benchmark entries and no wins recorded for either part. The percentile vs all GPUs is 50 for both, which places them at the median of the database's GPU distribution, but that percentile is not tied to any actual benchmark score in the records. The use-case split is therefore structural: the AMD part is a display-capable, low-power graphics processor; the Intel part is a high-throughput accelerator with no display outputs.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers and different design philosophies. AMD uses the Van Gogh chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 7 nm process. Intel uses the Ponte Vecchio chip built on Generation 12.5 architecture, fabricated by Intel on a 10 nm process. Transistor counts differ enormously: AMD packs 2,400 million transistors into a 163 mm² die for a density of 14.7 million transistors per mm², while Intel packs 100,000 million transistors into a 1280 mm² die for a density of 78.1 million transistors per mm². The Intel die is roughly 7.9 times larger in area and holds roughly 41.7 times more transistors.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. AMD uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128 bit bus with a 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. Intel uses 48 GB of HBM2e on an 8192 bit bus with 1.23 TB/s bandwidth. The bus width difference is extreme: Intel's 8192 bit interface is 64 times wider than AMD's 128 bit bus. This explains how Intel achieves its bandwidth advantage without relying on a much higher memory clock; the AMD memory runs at 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective), while Intel's runs at 600 MHz (1200 Mbps effective).

Clock behavior also differs. Both parts share a 1000 MHz base clock, but AMD boosts to 1600 MHz while Intel boosts to 1550 MHz. The AMD part reaches a higher peak clock despite its much lower power envelope, which reflects its simpler, lower-density design. The Intel part trades a slightly lower boost clock for vastly more execution resources.

Feature sets reflect their intended markets. The AMD part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and provides one USB Type-C display output. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan entry and no display outputs. The Intel part uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface and a dual-slot cooler with a single 12-pin power connector, with a suggested PSU of 700 W. The AMD part lists no bus interface, no slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU, consistent with a low-power part that may not require an external power connection.

The production status for both is Active. AMD's release date is recorded as 2024-12-31, while Intel's is 2023-01-09. The Intel part has a recorded successor, H3C Graphics; the AMD part has no successor listed. Neither part has a listed predecessor or launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The data shows two devices with almost no overlap in intended use. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU is a 15 W, 7 nm part with 16 GB of LPDDR5, a USB Type-C output, and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan. It is appropriate for systems that need a display-capable GPU in a low-power package. Its 1.638 TFLOPS FP32 and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth are enough for light graphics work but are not competitive with the Intel part in compute throughput.

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 is a 300 W, dual-slot accelerator with 48 GB of HBM2e, 22.22 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16, and no display outputs. It belongs in a server or workstation where PCIe 5.0 x16 connectivity, a 700 W PSU recommendation, and a 12-pin power connector are acceptable. Its 56 ray tracing cores and 7168 shading units make it the clear choice for parallel compute and large-scale data processing. The lack of Vulkan support and the older DirectX 12 (12_1) feature level are not relevant for a card with no display outputs.

Who should pick which follows directly from the recorded specifications. A builder assembling a compact, low-power system with a display connection should pick the AMD part. A data center operator running compute workloads that need high memory bandwidth and massive FP32 throughput should pick the Intel part. The two parts do not compete in the same segment, and the database confirms this with no head-to-head benchmark results and no wins for either side.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 delivers 22.22 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU delivers 1.638 TFLOPS. Intel is roughly 13.6 times higher.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: AMD uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128 bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. Intel uses 48 GB of HBM2e on an 8192 bit bus with 1.23 TB/s bandwidth. Intel has 4 times the memory capacity and roughly 12 times the bandwidth.

Q: Can the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 drive a display?

A: No. The Intel part lists no display outputs. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU lists one USB Type-C display output.

Q: What are the power requirements of each part?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has a 15 W TDP and lists no power connectors or suggested PSU. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has a 300 W TDP, uses a dual-slot cooler with one 12-pin power connector, and lists a 700 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which GPU supports more advanced graphics APIs?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan entry.

Q: Do the two GPUs share the same process node and foundry?

A: No. AMD uses TSMC's 7 nm process, while Intel uses its own 10 nm process. AMD's die is 163 mm², while Intel's is 1280 mm².

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two GPUs. Wins are recorded as 0 for both. The comparison must therefore be drawn from the specification table, where the differences are stark and consistent.

The largest win for the Intel part is FP32 throughput. Intel's 22.22 TFLOPS against AMD's 1.638 TFLOPS is a multiple of roughly 13.6. FP16 tells a similar story: Intel sustains 22.22 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while AMD manages 3.277 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. A 1:1 FP16 ratio means Intel does not halve its throughput when switching to FP16, which matters for workloads that mix precision levels.

Memory bandwidth is the second major Intel win. Intel's 1.23 TB/s is about 12 times AMD's 102.4 GB/s. The bus width difference drives this: 8192 bit versus 128 bit. Texture rate follows the same pattern, with Intel at 694.4 GTexel/s versus AMD's 51.20 GTexel/s, a multiple of about 13.6. Shading units are 7168 versus 512, a multiple of 14. Ray tracing cores are 56 versus 8, a multiple of 7.

The AMD part wins in a few specific areas. Its boost clock is 1600 MHz versus Intel's 1550 MHz, a 50 MHz advantage. Its pixel rate is 25.60 GPixel/s versus Intel's 0 MPixel/s, because the Intel part has no ROPs listed and no display pipeline. AMD's memory clock is 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective) versus Intel's 600 MHz (1200 Mbps effective), though Intel compensates with a vastly wider bus. AMD also supports Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while Intel lists no Vulkan and DirectX 12 (12_1). Power draw is another AMD win: 15 W versus 300 W, a 20 times difference.

Transistor density favors Intel. Intel packs 78.1 million transistors per mm² versus AMD's 14.7 million per mm². Total transistors favor Intel overwhelmingly: 100,000 million versus 2,400 million, a ratio of roughly 41.7. The Intel die is 1280 mm² versus 163 mm², about 7.9 times larger.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every recorded field. Process node: AMD 7 nm from TSMC, Intel 10 nm from Intel. Transistors: AMD 2,400 million, Intel 100,000 million. Die size: AMD 163 mm², Intel 1280 mm². Transistor density: AMD 14.7 million per mm², Intel 78.1 million per mm².

Clocks: both have a 1000 MHz base, but AMD boosts to 1600 MHz and Intel to 1550 MHz. Memory clocks: AMD 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective), Intel 600 MHz (1200 Mbps effective). Memory size: AMD 16 GB LPDDR5, Intel 48 GB HBM2e. Bus width: AMD 128 bit, Intel 8192 bit. Bandwidth: AMD 102.4 GB/s, Intel 1.23 TB/s.

Execution resources: AMD has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. Intel has 7168 shading units, 448 TMUs, 0 ROPs, and 56 ray tracing cores. Pixel rate: AMD 25.60 GPixel/s, Intel 0 MPixel/s. Texture rate: AMD 51.20 GTexel/s, Intel 694.4 GTexel/s. FP32: AMD 1.638 TFLOPS, Intel 22.22 TFLOPS. FP16: AMD 3.277 TFLOPS (2:1), Intel 22.22 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and physical: AMD 15 W TDP with no slot width, power connectors, suggested PSU, or bus interface listed. Intel 300 W TDP, dual-slot, one 12-pin power connector, 700 W suggested PSU, PCIe 5.0 x16, and a length of 267 mm (10.5 inches). Display outputs: AMD one USB Type-C, Intel none. APIs: AMD DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4; Intel DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, no Vulkan. Release dates: AMD 2024-12-31, Intel 2023-01-09. Intel lists a successor, H3C Graphics; AMD does not. Neither part has a launch MSRP in the database.