AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU vs Intel Arc 130V Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU or the Intel Arc 130V Mobile, and the head-to-head benchmark list is empty. The average benchmark score for both parts is recorded as zero, and both sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Without measured performance data, the comparison must rely entirely on architectural specifications, clock behavior, and feature sets.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers a peak FP32 throughput of 4.147 TFLOPS, which is 25.1% higher than the Intel Arc 130V Mobile's 3.315 TFLOPS. This raw compute advantage appears in both single-precision and half-precision workloads; the AMD part reaches 8.294 TFLOPS FP16, while the Intel part reaches 6.630 TFLOPS FP16. The AMD GPU also holds a lead in pixel throughput, with 86.40 GPixel/s versus 51.80 GPixel/s on the Intel part, a difference of 66.8%. Texture rate favors AMD as well, with 129.6 GTexel/s compared to 103.6 GTexel/s, a 25.1% margin.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The AMD GPU boosts to 2700 MHz, while the Intel GPU boosts to only 1850 MHz. The base clocks are even further apart: 800 MHz on AMD versus 300 MHz on Intel. However, the Intel part operates within a higher TDP envelope of 37 W, versus 28 W for the AMD part. The AMD GPU compensates for its higher clocks with a larger process node and higher power draw relative to its performance class.

The Intel Arc 130V Mobile has more shading units (896 versus 768) and more texture mapping units (56 versus 48), but fewer ROPs (28 versus 32). Despite having more shaders, Intel's lower clock speed results in fewer actual operations per second. The AMD GPU's higher pixel rate suggests stronger fill-rate performance for resolution-bound scenarios, while the Intel GPU's extra texture units at a lower clock rate produce less aggregate texture throughput.

Ray tracing hardware exists on both parts, with 12 RT cores on AMD and 7 RT cores on Intel. No benchmark data validates real-world ray tracing performance, so the core count difference alone does not guarantee a definitive win in ray-traced titles.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU wins in raw compute throughput, pixel fill rate, and texture fill rate. Its FP32 output of 4.147 TFLOPS exceeds the Intel part by 25.1%, which benefits general-purpose GPU compute tasks, shader-heavy rendering, and modern game engines that rely heavily on parallel FP32 execution. The 86.40 GPixel/s pixel rate gives AMD an edge in scenarios that stress rasterization output, such as high-resolution rendering with heavy overdraw or multi-sample anti-aliasing. The 129.6 GTexel/s texture rate supports high-resolution texture sampling in detail-rich scenes.

The Intel Arc 130V Mobile wins in architectural efficiency per clock. It operates at a 37 W TDP, higher than AMD's 28 W, but its 300 MHz base clock suggests a design focused on burst behavior rather than sustained high-frequency operation. With 896 shading units and 56 TMUs, Intel's architecture offers more parallel execution resources per clock; if clock speeds were equalized, Intel would likely outpace AMD in shader and texture work. The Intel part also integrates directly as an IGP with a system-shared memory interface, which simplifies system design and eliminates the need for dedicated VRAM allocation.

The AMD GPU uses 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. This fixed memory pool provides predictable performance for workloads that require large resident textures or datasets. The Intel part shares system memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent. In a system with fast LPDDR5X memory, Intel's shared memory approach could match or exceed AMD's dedicated bandwidth, but the database does not specify actual memory speeds for Intel.

For ray tracing, AMD's 12 RT cores exceed Intel's 7, but without benchmark scores, the practical advantage remains speculative. The AMD part also has a higher boost clock by 850 MHz, which amplifies all of its per-clock advantages.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses the Rembrandt+ chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on TSMC's 6 nm process. It contains 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 63.0 million per square millimeter. The architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its memory subsystem uses dedicated 16 GB LPDDR5 with a 128-bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU operates with a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2700 MHz, with memory running at 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective). Power draw is rated at 28 W TDP, and it has no external power connectors, drawing everything from the system board.

The Intel Arc 130V Mobile uses the Lunar Lake chip with Xe2-LPG architecture, built on TSMC's 3 nm process. Its die measures 172 mm², but the transistor count and density are listed as unknown. The memory configuration is system shared, meaning the GPU uses the same memory pool as the CPU, with bandwidth dependent on the host system's memory implementation. Base clock is 300 MHz, boost clock is 1850 MHz, and TDP is 37 W. The Intel part is classified as an IGP with a system-shared bus interface. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its predecessor is listed as HD Graphics-M.

The process node difference is significant: 3 nm on Intel versus 6 nm on AMD. This gives Intel a density advantage, though the exact transistor counts are not recorded for Intel. The AMD GPU's higher transistor count (13,100 million) on a larger die reflects its dedicated graphics design with fixed memory controllers. The Intel part integrates into a system-on-chip design, sharing power and thermal budgets with the CPU.

Both parts support the same API levels, so software compatibility is equivalent. The AMD GPU has a dedicated memory bus, while Intel relies on shared memory, which affects latency and bandwidth predictability. AMD's 12 RT cores versus Intel's 7 RT cores indicates different ray tracing hardware investments, though no performance data validates either implementation.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers 4.147 TFLOPS FP32, which is 25.1% higher than the Intel Arc 130V Mobile's 3.315 TFLOPS. AMD also leads in FP16 with 8.294 TFLOPS versus 6.630 TFLOPS.

Q: How does memory configuration differ between the two?

A: The AMD GPU uses 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel GPU uses system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent, meaning it shares the host system's memory and bus.

Q: Which GPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The AMD GPU runs at a base clock of 800 MHz and boosts to 2700 MHz. The Intel GPU runs at a base clock of 300 MHz and boosts to 1850 MHz. AMD's boost clock is 850 MHz higher.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each GPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is rated at 28 W TDP. The Intel Arc 130V Mobile is rated at 37 W TDP. Intel's higher TDP allows for more sustained power draw despite lower clock speeds.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. There is no API compatibility difference between the two parts.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Intel Arc 130V Mobile has 896 shading units, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has 768. Despite fewer units, AMD achieves higher FP32 throughput due to its higher clock speeds.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU | Intel Arc 130V Mobile |

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

| Process node | 6 nm | 3 nm |

| Die size | 208 mm² | 172 mm² |

| Transistors | 13,100 million | unknown |

| Transistor density | 63.0M / mm² | null |

| Base clock | 800 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2700 MHz | 1850 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 | 768 | 896 |

| TMUs | 48 | 56 |

| ROPs | 32 | 28 |

| RT cores | 12 | 7 |

| Pixel rate | 86.40 GPixel/s | 51.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 129.6 GTexel/s | 103.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.147 TFLOPS | 3.315 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.294 TFLOPS | 6.630 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 28 W | 37 W |

| Bus interface | null | IGP |

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

| Release date | 2024-12-31 | 2024-09-23 |

| Predecessor | null | HD Graphics-M |

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is the stronger discrete-style graphics solution for raw performance. It leads in FP32 compute by 25.1%, in pixel rate by 66.8%, and in texture rate by 25.1%. Its dedicated 16 GB LPDDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent, predictable bandwidth for demanding workloads. The 2700 MHz boost clock, combined with 12 RT cores, positions it as the better choice for gaming and compute tasks that rely on sustained high-frequency execution.

The Intel Arc 130V Mobile is the more integrated option. Its 3 nm process node indicates a modern manufacturing advantage, and its system-shared memory simplifies system design by eliminating dedicated VRAM requirements. The higher TDP of 37 W suggests it can draw more power for burst operations, but its 300 MHz base clock and 1850 MHz boost clock limit sustained throughput. With 896 shading units, it offers more parallel resources per clock, but the actual execution rate falls behind AMD.

For users prioritizing raw GPU throughput, dedicated memory, and higher fill rates, the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is the clear choice based on the recorded specifications. For users building a compact, power-efficient system where dedicated graphics memory is unnecessary and the GPU shares resources with the CPU, the Intel Arc 130V Mobile offers a viable alternative, though with lower peak performance. The absence of benchmark scores leaves performance validation to real-world testing, but the architectural data favors AMD in nearly every measurable throughput category.