AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU vs Intel Arc 140V 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 140V Mobile. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero, and the head-to-head benchmark array is empty. This means direct performance comparisons cannot be established through measured workloads at this time.

Both parts hold a percentile rank of 50 against all GPUs in the database, placing them at the midpoint of the distribution. With identical percentile positions and no recorded wins for either side, the recorded data offers no numerical basis for declaring a performance leader.

The absence of benchmark entries affects both products equally. The AMD part shows no wins, and the Intel part shows no wins. Neither product has any nearest rivals listed, so relative performance against similar hardware cannot be derived from the database either.

What can be stated from the data is limited to theoretical specifications. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers 4.147 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc 140V Mobile delivers 3.994 TFLOPS. That puts the AMD part ahead by roughly 3.8 percent in raw single-precision throughput, a margin that falls within typical run-to-run variance for most workloads.

In FP16 compute, the AMD part reaches 8.294 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, while the Intel part reaches 7.987 TFLOPS under the same 2:1 scheme. The AMD advantage persists at approximately 3.8 percent in half-precision work as well.

Texture throughput favors the AMD part at 129.6 GTexel/s versus 124.8 GTexel/s for Intel, a difference of about 3.8 percent. Pixel fill rate, however, goes the other way. The AMD part achieves 86.40 GPixel/s, while the Intel part achieves 62.40 GPixel/s, giving AMD a 38.5 percent lead in this metric.

These theoretical figures indicate the AMD part holds a consistent edge in raw shading throughput and pixel output. The Intel part counters with a higher shader count: 1024 shading units against 768, and 64 texture mapping units against 48. Yet the Intel part's lower clock ceiling of 1950 MHz boost versus 2700 MHz boost on the AMD part reduces the advantage those extra units would otherwise provide.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different design lineages. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses the Rembrandt+ chip built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, produced on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile uses the Lunar Lake chip built on the Xe2-LPG architecture, produced on a 3 nm process at the same foundry.

Transistor counts differ substantially. The AMD part integrates 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 63.0 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel part's transistor count is listed as unknown, but its die size is 172 mm². The process node difference, 6 nm versus 3 nm, indicates the Intel part uses a more advanced fabrication technology.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory on a 128 bit bus, providing 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile uses system shared memory, with its type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. This means the Intel part's memory performance varies with the host platform, while the AMD part has a fixed, dedicated allocation.

Clock behavior also differs. The AMD part runs at an 800 MHz base clock and boosts to 2700 MHz. The Intel part starts at 300 MHz base and boosts to 1950 MHz. The AMD part's memory clock is listed at 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective speed, while the Intel part's memory clock is system shared.

Ray tracing hardware exists on both, but with different counts. The AMD part includes 12 ray tracing cores, while the Intel part includes 8. The AMD part also specifies 32 ROPs, matching the Intel part's 32 ROPs, so pixel output capability per clock is identical. The AMD part's higher pixel rate comes entirely from its higher clock speed.

Power envelopes differ as well. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has a 28 W TDP, while the Intel Arc 140V Mobile has a 37 W TDP. The Intel part consumes more power by specification, yet still produces lower theoretical throughput figures.

The AMD part lists a single display output via USB Type-C, while the Intel part's display outputs are portable device dependent. The Intel part is classified as an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with an IGP bus interface, whereas the AMD part does not specify a bus interface.

Both parts support DirectX 12 Ultimate at feature level 12_2, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. API compatibility is identical across the two.

Where Each One Wins

Based solely on theoretical specifications, the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU wins in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 figure of 4.147 TFLOPS exceeds the Intel part's 3.994 TFLOPS. Its FP16 figure of 8.294 TFLOPS exceeds the Intel part's 7.987 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 129.6 GTexel/s exceeds the Intel part's 124.8 GTexel/s. Its pixel rate of 86.40 GPixel/s exceeds the Intel part's 62.40 GPixel/s by a wide margin.

The AMD part also has more ray tracing cores at 12 versus 8, and a higher boost clock at 2700 MHz versus 1950 MHz. It carries dedicated 16 GB LPDDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, which removes dependency on system memory performance.

The Intel Arc 140V Mobile wins in shader count with 1024 shading units versus 768. It also has more texture mapping units at 64 versus 48. Its 3 nm process node indicates a more modern fabrication approach, and its 37 W TDP allows for a higher power draw, though the database does not record whether this translates into sustained performance advantages.

The Intel part also has a longer production window in the database. Its release date is listed as September 2024, while the AMD part's release date is December 2024.

For workloads that scale with shading unit count, such as geometry processing or certain compute shaders, the Intel part may hold an advantage per clock. For workloads that scale with clock speed, memory bandwidth, or pixel fill, the AMD part appears stronger.

The AMD part's dedicated memory bus of 128 bit provides predictable bandwidth. The Intel part's system shared memory makes its bandwidth dependent on the host system's memory configuration, which the database lists as simply "System Dependent."

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers higher theoretical throughput across every compute metric that the database tracks. It leads in FP32, FP16, texture rate, pixel rate, ray tracing cores, and clock speed. Its dedicated 16 GB LPDDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth provides fixed performance characteristics that do not vary with the host platform.

The Intel Arc 140V Mobile counters with more shading units, more texture mapping units, and a smaller 3 nm process node. Its system shared memory approach means it relies on the host system's memory subsystem, which the database does not quantify. Its 37 W TDP exceeds the AMD part's 28 W TDP, but the database records no performance data to show what that extra power delivers.

For users who prioritize raw fill rates, compute throughput, and dedicated memory bandwidth, the AMD part has the specification advantage. For users who prioritize shader unit count and process efficiency, the Intel part has the architectural advantage.

The database contains no benchmark measurements for either product, so the verdict rests entirely on specification analysis. The AMD part's consistent lead in pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 compute makes it the stronger choice on paper. The Intel part's higher shader count and newer process node leave room for potential efficiency gains, but the recorded data does not confirm any performance benefit.

Neither product has a launch MSRP listed, so no cost-based comparison is possible. Both parts hold equal percentile rankings of 50, and both have zero average benchmark scores. The selection between them depends on which theoretical advantages matter more for the intended workload.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU leads with 4.147 TFLOPS, compared to the Intel Arc 140V Mobile's 3.994 TFLOPS.

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.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory on a 128 bit bus. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile uses system shared memory, with size and type dependent on the host system.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has 12 ray tracing cores, while the Intel Arc 140V Mobile has 8.

Q: What is the process node for each GPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses a 6 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile uses a 3 nm process at TSMC.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has a 28 W TDP, while the Intel Arc 140V Mobile has a 37 W TDP.

Specification Differences

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

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

| Chip | Rembrandt+ | Lunar Lake |

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Xe2-LPG |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 3 nm |

| Die Size | 208 mm² | 172 mm² |

| Transistors | 13,100 million | Unknown |

| Transistor Density | 63.0M / mm² | Not listed |

| Base Clock | 800 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2700 MHz | 1950 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 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 12 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 86.40 GPixel/s | 62.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 129.6 GTexel/s | 124.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.147 TFLOPS | 3.994 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.294 TFLOPS (2:1) | 7.987 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 28 W | 37 W |

| Slot Width | Not listed | IGP |

| Bus Interface | Not listed | IGP |

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

| Release Date | December 2024 | September 2024 |

| Predecessor | Not listed | HD Graphics-M |