AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU vs Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no benchmark scores for either the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU or the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile, and the head-to-head comparison table is empty. This means a direct performance delta cannot be quantified from the database. Both parts hold identical percentile rankings at the 50th percentile versus all GPUs, and both have an average benchmark score of zero in the current dataset. What the database does provide is a clear structural and architectural separation that explains why these two mobile graphics solutions occupy different performance classes.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU delivers 1.638 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile delivers 384.0 GFLOPS. The AMD part is therefore 4.27 times higher in raw floating-point throughput, a gap that dominates any workload relying on shader math. In texture fill rate, the AMD GPU reaches 51.20 GTexel/s against 12.00 GTexel/s for Intel, a 4.27 times advantage as well. Pixel fill rate shows a similar story: 25.60 GPixel/s versus 4.000 GPixel/s, meaning the AMD solution can drive 6.4 times more pixels per second. These are not marginal differences; they place the Ryzen Z2 A GPU in a different tier of mobile graphics capability.

Memory bandwidth reinforces the separation. The AMD part uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 over a 128 bit bus, producing 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, so no fixed figure exists. In practical terms, the AMD GPU has a dedicated, high-bandwidth memory subsystem that does not compete with the CPU for the same pool, while the Intel solution depends entirely on the host platform's memory configuration.

Clock speeds also differ substantially. The AMD GPU has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1600 MHz. The Intel part runs at a 300 MHz base and a 1000 MHz boost. The AMD part's peak clock is 60% higher than Intel's peak, and its base clock is more than triple Intel's base. Higher clocks amplify the already large shader count advantage: 512 shading units on AMD versus 192 on Intel, 32 TMUs versus 12, and 16 ROPs versus 4.

The result is that in any measured benchmark, the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU would be expected to dominate across the board. The database does not list a single benchmark where Intel wins, nor does it list a single benchmark where AMD wins, because the fields are empty. However, the specification data alone supports a decisive verdict: the AMD part has more compute units, more memory bandwidth, higher clocks, and faster fill rates in every category recorded.

Where Each One Wins

Given the absence of benchmark results, the use-case split must be inferred strictly from the recorded specifications. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU wins in every compute-heavy scenario. Its 512 shading units and 1.638 TFLOPS FP32 throughput position it for modern 3D rendering, shader-intensive effects, and higher resolution gaming. The 8 RT cores provide hardware ray tracing acceleration, a feature entirely absent from the Intel part, which lists no RT cores. The 16 GB LPDDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth supports larger textures and more complex scenes without spilling to system memory.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile wins in power efficiency, at least on paper. Its TDP is 6 W, compared to 15 W for the AMD GPU. That 9 W difference means the Intel solution draws 60% less power. For ultra-portable devices, fanless designs, or battery-constrained workloads, the Intel part offers a lower thermal and power footprint. Its 192 shading units and 384.0 GFLOPS are sufficient for basic display output, video playback, and light 2D acceleration, but not for demanding 3D work.

The Intel part also wins on integration simplicity. It uses a Ring Bus interface and system shared memory, meaning no separate VRAM allocation is needed. The AMD GPU requires a dedicated 16 GB LPDDR5 pool, which adds cost and complexity to the platform design. For a minimal embedded or low-power mobile device, the Intel IGP approach with a 4.000 GPixel/s pixel rate and 12.00 GTexel/s texture rate handles everyday desktop compositing without dedicated memory management.

The AMD part wins on API support for modern graphics features. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel part only supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, so the API gap is specifically in the DirectX feature tier. The 12_2 tier includes features like hardware ray tracing and mesh shaders, which the Intel part cannot claim.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses the Van Gogh chip with an RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses the Twin Lake chip with an Xe-LP architecture, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The process node difference is significant: 7 nm versus 10 nm, which gives AMD a density advantage. The AMD chip contains 2,400 million transistors on a 163 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 14.7 million per square millimeter. Intel's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown, so no direct density comparison can be made from the database.

The AMD part has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Intel part has 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. The AMD part has 8 RT cores; the Intel part has none. Neither part lists tensor cores. The AMD part's FP16 throughput is 3.277 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, while the Intel part's FP16 is 768.0 GFLOPS also at a 2:1 ratio. Both architectures use a 2:1 FP16/FP32 ratio, so the relative compute advantage holds in half-precision workloads as well.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The AMD GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 over a 128 bit bus, with a memory clock of 800 MHz and 6.4 Gbps effective data rate, producing 102.4 GB/s. The Intel part uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth and system shared bus width. There is no dedicated VRAM on the Intel solution. This means the AMD GPU can sustain high bandwidth regardless of CPU load, while the Intel GPU's memory performance is contingent on the host platform's memory configuration.

The display output also differs. The AMD GPU lists a single USB Type-C output. The Intel part lists "Portable Device Dependent," meaning its display connectivity varies by device implementation. Both parts have a production status of Active and a release date of 2024-12-31T17:00:00.000Z. Neither lists a launch MSRP, predecessor, or successor in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU delivers 1.638 TFLOPS FP32, which is 4.27 times the 384.0 GFLOPS of the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile.

Q: Does the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile support hardware ray tracing?

A: No. The Intel part lists no RT cores, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU includes 8 RT cores.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each GPU have?

A: The AMD GPU has 102.4 GB/s from 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128 bit bus. The Intel GPU uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, so no fixed bandwidth figure is recorded.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU boosts to 1600 MHz, while the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile boosts to 1000 MHz. AMD's base clock is 1000 MHz, which equals Intel's boost clock.

Q: What are the power requirements of each GPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has a TDP of 15 W. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has a TDP of 6 W.

Q: Which GPU supports a newer DirectX feature level?

A: The AMD GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Intel GPU supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU as the stronger performer in every measurable graphics metric. It has more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, higher clocks, dedicated memory, and hardware ray tracing. The 4.27 times advantage in FP32 compute and 6.4 times advantage in pixel fill rate are decisive for any 3D workload. The 102.4 GB/s of dedicated bandwidth versus system dependent shared memory further solidifies its position for gaming and graphics-intensive applications.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is the lower-power alternative. At 6 W TDP versus 15 W, it consumes 60% less power. For devices where thermal limits or battery life take priority over graphics performance, the Intel part serves as a basic display and video solution. Its 192 shading units and 384.0 GFLOPS are adequate for 2D compositing and media playback but insufficient for modern 3D gaming.

The database shows no benchmark scores, so the verdict rests on specification analysis. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU is the choice for users who need actual graphics capability, including ray tracing and high fill rates. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is the choice for minimal power draw in portable or embedded designs where graphics demands are modest. The 50th percentile ranking for both parts in the all-GPU distribution reflects the database's current lack of measured performance data, not a real equivalence in capability.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU | Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile |

|----------------|-------------------|----------------------------|

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Xe-LP |

| Chip | Van Gogh | Twin Lake |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 2,400 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 163 mm² | unknown |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1600 MHz | 1000 MHz |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | LPDDR5 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 512 | 192 |

| TMUs | 32 | 12 |

| ROPs | 16 | 4 |

| RT Cores | 8 | none |

| Pixel Rate | 25.60 GPixel/s | 4.000 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 51.20 GTexel/s | 12.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1.638 TFLOPS | 384.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 3.277 TFLOPS (2:1) | 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 6 W |

| Bus Interface | not listed | Ring Bus |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Display Outputs | 1x USB Type-C | Portable Device Dependent |

| Slot Width | not listed | IGP |