AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU vs Intel Arc 140T Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and the Intel Arc 140T Mobile. Both entries show empty benchmark arrays, zero average benchmark scores, and zero wins in the head-to-head comparison. Consequently, the analysis below relies entirely on the specification-derived performance indicators available in the database.

The most significant computational difference appears in peak floating-point throughput. The Intel Arc 140T Mobile delivers 4.813 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU reaches 4.147 TFLOPS. That places Intel approximately 16% ahead in raw shader throughput. The margin stems from Intel's higher shading unit count (1024 versus 768) and its boost clock of 2350 MHz, which, while lower than AMD's 2700 MHz boost, does not fully compensate for the 33% advantage in shader count.

Texture processing tells a similar story. Intel's 64 texture mapping units operating at 2350 MHz produce a texture rate of 150.4 GTexel/s. AMD's 48 TMUs at 2700 MHz achieve 129.6 GTexel/s. Intel leads by roughly 16% in this metric as well, consistent with the FP32 gap. Pixel throughput, however, favors AMD. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU renders 86.40 GPixel/s against Intel's 75.20 GPixel/s, an advantage of about 15%. Both parts have 32 ROPs, so AMD's higher clock speed accounts for the entire pixel-rate lead.

Memory bandwidth presents a stark contrast. AMD uses dedicated 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel's Arc 140T Mobile relies on system shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." No fixed number exists for Intel's memory throughput in the database. The practical implication is that AMD's memory subsystem is fully specified and consistent, whereas Intel's performance will vary with the host laptop's memory configuration. In scenarios where the system memory bandwidth falls below AMD's dedicated 102.4 GB/s, the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU will have a clear advantage in bandwidth-bound workloads.

Clock behavior differs substantially. AMD's base clock sits at 800 MHz with a 2700 MHz boost, while Intel starts at 300 MHz and boosts to 2350 MHz. The 500 MHz boost-clock gap favors AMD, but Intel's higher shader count mitigates that in compute-heavy tasks. The base clock difference (500 MHz) is more pronounced, suggesting AMD maintains higher minimum performance under sustained loads.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU wins in pixel-fill scenarios. The 86.40 GPixel/s output, driven by 32 ROPs at 2700 MHz, outpaces Intel's 75.20 GPixel/s. Games or workloads that emphasize rasterization and fill-rate limits, such as high-resolution rendering with simple shaders, will favor AMD. The dedicated 16 GB LPDDR5 pool with 102.4 GB/s ensures predictable memory behavior without contention from the CPU. The 12 ray tracing cores provide a substantial count for RT workloads, exceeding Intel's 8 RT cores by 50%.

Intel Arc 140T Mobile wins in shader-bound compute. The 1024 shading units deliver 4.813 TFLOPS FP32, which is 16% above AMD's 4.147 TFLOPS. Texture-heavy workloads also favor Intel: 150.4 GTexel/s versus 129.6 GTexel/s. Applications that scale with raw ALU throughput, such as physics simulation, compute shaders, or FP16 workloads, will see Intel ahead. Intel's FP16 output of 9.626 TFLOPS (2:1) exceeds AMD's 8.294 TFLOPS (2:1) by roughly 16% as well.

Power envelope differs: AMD runs at 28 W TDP, while Intel is rated at 35 W. The database shows no performance-per-watt metric, but the higher TDP suggests Intel allocates more power to achieve its compute lead. AMD's lower TDP may translate to longer battery life or thinner chassis designs, though no thermal or battery measurements exist in the data.

The Arc 140T Mobile is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a slot width of "IGP" and a bus interface of "IGP." The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU lists no slot width and no bus interface, indicating it may be a discrete or semi-discrete part. AMD's display output is listed as "1x USB Type-C," while Intel's is "Portable Device Dependent." This suggests AMD offers a standardized single-output solution, whereas Intel's display connectivity depends entirely on the laptop implementation.

Architecture Differences

AMD's Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses the Rembrandt+ chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture. The process node is 6 nm at TSMC, with 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 63.0 million per square millimeter. Intel's Arc 140T Mobile uses the Arrow Lake-H chip with Xe-LPG+ architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process. Intel's transistor count and die size are listed as "unknown," so no density comparison is possible.

The RDNA 2.0 architecture in AMD's part includes 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 RT cores. Intel's Xe-LPG+ configuration has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 RT cores. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither part lists tensor cores.

Memory architecture diverges completely. AMD implements a fixed 16 GB LPDDR5 configuration with a 128-bit bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. Intel uses system shared memory with type, bus width, and bandwidth all dependent on the host system. This means AMD's memory behavior is deterministic across all implementations, while Intel's varies from laptop to laptop. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU's memory clock is specified at 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective, whereas Intel's memory clock is listed as "System Shared."

Release timing shows AMD launched on 2024-12-31, while Intel followed on 2025-01-12. Both are marked as Active in production status. Intel's predecessor is listed as HD Graphics-M, while AMD has no predecessor recorded. The Arc 140T Mobile belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) generation, and the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU belongs to the Console GPU (AMD) generation.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc 140T Mobile delivers 4.813 TFLOPS FP32, which is 16% higher than the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU's 4.147 TFLOPS. Intel also leads in FP16 with 9.626 TFLOPS versus 8.294 TFLOPS.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare between the two?

A: AMD uses dedicated 16 GB LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 102.4 GB/s. Intel uses system shared memory with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent," so no fixed comparison number exists.

Q: Which part has more ray tracing cores?

A: AMD has 12 RT cores, while Intel has 8. This gives AMD a 50% advantage in RT core count.

Q: What are the power consumption ratings?

A: AMD is rated at 28 W TDP, and Intel is rated at 35 W TDP.

Q: Are both GPUs current production parts?

A: Yes, both are marked as Active. AMD released on 2024-12-31, and Intel released on 2025-01-12.

Q: Do both support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU | Intel Arc 140T Mobile |

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

| Chip | Rembrandt+ | Arrow Lake-H |

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Xe-LPG+ |

| Generation | Console GPU (AMD) | Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 13,100 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 208 mm² | unknown |

| Transistor Density | 63.0M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 800 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2700 MHz | 2350 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 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 48 | 64 |

| ROPs | 32 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 12 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 86.40 GPixel/s | 75.20 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 129.6 GTexel/s | 150.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.147 TFLOPS | 4.813 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.294 TFLOPS (2:1) | 9.626 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 28 W | 35 W |

| Slot Width | null | IGP |

| Bus Interface | null | IGP |

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

| Release Date | 2024-12-31 | 2025-01-12 |

| Predecessor | null | HD Graphics-M |

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear split by workload type. The Intel Arc 140T Mobile is the stronger compute part. Its 4.813 TFLOPS FP32, 150.4 GTexel/s texture rate, and 1024 shading units give it a 16% advantage in shader-bound and texture-bound applications. The 35 W TDP reflects the additional power required for that performance. This part suits laptops where the memory system can deliver adequate bandwidth, though the "System Dependent" memory specification introduces variability across implementations.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is the stronger rasterization part. Its 86.40 GPixel/s pixel rate exceeds Intel's by 15%, and the dedicated 16 GB LPDDR5 with 102.4 GB/s provides fixed, predictable bandwidth. The 12 RT cores outnumber Intel's 8, suggesting better ray tracing throughput per core count. The lower 28 W TDP and the single USB Type-C display output indicate a simpler, more power-efficient design.

The percentile ranking for both parts is identical at 50 on the database's all-GPU scale, and both have zero average benchmark scores. Neither part shows a definitive overall winner in the recorded data. The choice depends on whether the workload prioritizes raw shader throughput (Intel) or fixed memory bandwidth and pixel fill (AMD). The Arc 140T Mobile also carries the predecessor designation of HD Graphics-M, marking it as an integrated solution, while AMD's part has no predecessor recorded. For users with memory-sensitive applications, AMD's dedicated memory subsystem removes uncertainty. For users with compute-heavy tasks, Intel's higher TFLOPS and texture rate are the decisive factors.