AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU vs Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU 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 Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile. Both entries show an average benchmark score of 0 and no nearest rivals, meaning no competitive measurements have been logged. The percentile ranking for both products is identical at 50, placing them at the median of all GPUs tracked in the database. Without scored workloads, the comparison must rely on the theoretical throughput metrics available in the specification records.

Looking at raw compute, the Intel part holds a measurable advantage in FP32 throughput. The Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile delivers 1.856 TFLOPS of single-precision performance, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU outputs 1.638 TFLOPS. That difference translates to roughly 13% higher FP32 throughput for Intel. The gap widens slightly in FP16, where Intel reaches 3.712 TFLOPS versus AMD’s 3.277 TFLOPS, both operating with a 2:1 ratio. Texture and pixel rates follow the same pattern: Intel posts 58.00 GTexel/s and 29.00 GPixel/s, while AMD counters with 51.20 GTexel/s and 25.60 GPixel/s. Each of these figures favors Intel by approximately 13% to 14%.

However, the AMD part answers with architectural features that Intel lacks. The Ryzen Z2 A GPU includes 8 dedicated ray tracing cores, a capability entirely absent from the Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile. DirectX support also differs: AMD enables 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas Intel is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). These distinctions matter for workloads that utilize hardware-accelerated ray tracing or require the full feature set of the 12_2 API level. In those scenarios, the AMD part has a functional edge that raw FLOP counts do not capture.

Memory configuration further separates the two. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile relies on system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent and no fixed capacity. For graphics workloads that stress memory throughput, the AMD solution provides a dedicated, consistent bandwidth figure. The Intel part’s performance would scale with the host system’s memory configuration, which the database records as variable.

Clock behavior also differs. AMD runs a base clock of 1000 MHz with a boost of 1600 MHz. Intel starts lower at 300 MHz base but boosts to 1450 MHz. The AMD boost clock is 10% higher than Intel’s, which helps close part of the raw throughput gap despite fewer shading units. The AMD part operates 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while Intel fields 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs. Intel’s wider execution resources drive its higher peak rates, but the AMD clock advantage narrows the real-world delta.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. AMD uses the Van Gogh chip built on RDNA 2.0, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The die measures 163 mm² and contains 2,400 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 14.7 million per square millimeter. Intel counters with the Raptor Lake chip using Generation 12.2 architecture, manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel. The database lists no transistor count or die size for the Intel part, so density cannot be compared.

The memory subsystem presents a major architectural divergence. AMD integrates 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with a fixed bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and a memory clock of 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective). Intel shares system memory, with the type, bus width, and bandwidth all marked as system shared or system dependent. This means the AMD part has a self-contained memory pipeline, while Intel’s performance depends on the host platform’s memory configuration.

Shader and fixed-function resources differ as well. AMD allocates 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units, plus 8 ray tracing cores. Intel provides 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores listed. The Intel architecture uses a ring bus interface, while AMD’s bus interface is not recorded. Intel’s slot width is designated as IGP, confirming its integrated position, whereas AMD’s slot width is not listed.

API support shows clear differences. AMD reaches DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Intel matches OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4 but caps at DirectX 12 (12_1). That single API tier difference can exclude Intel from certain modern rendering features that require 12_2. Ray tracing support, present in AMD’s hardware, has no counterpart in Intel’s specification.

Process technology favors AMD on paper. The 7 nm node at TSMC is smaller than Intel’s 10 nm process. The AMD die is physically larger at 163 mm², but this includes the integrated memory controller and 16 GB of LPDDR5 on-package or nearby. Intel’s die size is unrecorded, so full area comparisons are not possible. The power envelope for both is identical at 15 W TDP, indicating comparable thermal budgets.

Release timing also differs. AMD’s Ryzen Z2 A GPU has a release date of December 31, 2024, while Intel’s Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile launched January 3, 2023. Intel’s part has a defined successor (Arc Graphics-M), while AMD lists no successor. Both products remain active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 performance?

A: The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile leads with 1.856 TFLOPS, compared to the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU’s 1.638 TFLOPS, a difference of approximately 13%.

Q: Does either GPU support hardware ray tracing?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU includes 8 ray tracing cores. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile lists no ray tracing hardware.

Q: How do their memory configurations differ?

A: AMD uses 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. Intel uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Q: What are the DirectX version differences?

A: AMD supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while Intel supports DirectX 12 (12_1). OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4 are identical on both.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: Intel has 640 shading units versus AMD’s 512. Intel also has more TMUs (40 versus 32) and ROPs (20 versus 16).

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: AMD runs at 1000 MHz base and 1600 MHz boost. Intel runs at 300 MHz base and 1450 MHz boost. AMD’s boost clock is 10% higher.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU | Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile |

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

| Chip | Van Gogh | Raptor Lake |

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Generation 12.2 |

| Generation | Console GPU (AMD) | HD Graphics-M (Raptor Lake) |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 2,400 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 163 mm² | Not listed |

| Transistor Density | 14.7M / mm² | Not listed |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1600 MHz | 1450 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 800 MHz 6.4 Gbps effective | System Shared |

| 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 | 640 |

| TMUs | 32 | 40 |

| ROPs | 16 | 20 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 8 | Not listed |

| Pixel Rate | 25.60 GPixel/s | 29.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 51.20 GTexel/s | 58.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1.638 TFLOPS | 1.856 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 3.277 TFLOPS (2:1) | 3.712 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| Bus Interface | Not listed | Ring Bus |

| Slot Width | Not listed | IGP |

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

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

| Release Date | 2024-12-31 | 2023-01-03 |

| Successor | Not listed | Arc Graphics-M |

The Verdict

The database presents two distinct profiles. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile holds the lead in every measured throughput metric: FP32, FP16, pixel rate, and texture rate. Its 640 shading units and higher clock ceiling relative to its base give it a consistent edge in conventional rasterization workloads. For users prioritizing peak fill rates and raw compute in legacy or standard DirectX 12 (12_1) titles, the Intel part shows the stronger specification sheet.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU counters with three decisive advantages. First, it includes 8 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature Intel lacks entirely. Second, it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), enabling the full modern graphics feature set. Third, it uses 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, removing dependence on host system memory. These factors make the AMD part better suited for ray-traced content, 12_2-exclusive effects, and scenarios where consistent memory bandwidth matters.

Thermal constraints are equal: both parts carry a 15 W TDP. The AMD boost clock is 10% higher, which partially offsets its fewer shading units. Process technology favors AMD at 7 nm versus Intel’s 10 nm, though Intel’s smaller die footprint is not recorded for comparison.

The data indicates that the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile is the faster traditional rasterizer, with 13% higher FP32 throughput and correspondingly higher texture and pixel rates. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU is the more feature-complete product for modern graphics APIs and ray tracing, backed by a dedicated memory pool. Users whose workloads rely on 12_2 features or ray tracing should prioritize AMD. Users targeting maximum conventional fill rates within a 15 W envelope should consider Intel. Both sit at the 50th percentile of all GPUs in the database, reflecting median standing, and neither has logged benchmark scores yet.