AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU vs Intel Arc Graphics 32EU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data does not include any direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and neither part has a win count allocated from comparative testing. This absence of paired measurements means a direct score-to-score comparison cannot be derived from the database.

What the database does contain is a single benchmark entry for the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733. That result places the Intel part at the 3rd percentile among all GPUs tracked by the database. Its nearest recorded rivals are tightly clustered: the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU and Intel Arc Graphics 64EU both average 733, a 0% delta, while the AMD Radeon HD 6470M scores 723, which is 1.4% behind, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M scores 751, which is 2.4% ahead. This clustering indicates the Arc Graphics 32EU sits in a performance band where small movements of a few points shift relative standing.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has no benchmark scores recorded in the database, and no nearest rivals are listed for it. Its percentile versus all GPUs is 50, which places it at the median of the tracked distribution, but no raw score accompanies that percentile. Without a measured benchmark result for the AMD part, no quantitative head-to-head win can be stated. The data confirms only that the Intel part has a validated 733 score and a 3rd percentile standing, while the AMD part carries a median percentile designation with no supporting benchmark figure.

The lack of direct comparative data means any numeric claim about which part wins in a specific test would be unsupported. The database records one measurable result for Intel and none for AMD in this pairing. That asymmetry is the defining feature of the head-to-head section.

FAQ

Q: What benchmark score does the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU have in the database?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU records a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733, which is also its average benchmark score.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has an empty benchmarks array and an average benchmark score of 0.

Q: How does the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It is exactly level with the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU and Intel Arc Graphics 64EU at 733 (0% delta), 1.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 6470M at 723, and 2.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M at 751.

Q: What percentile does each part occupy?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU is at the 3rd percentile among all GPUs, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is at the 50th percentile.

Q: Which part has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU boosts to 2700 MHz, while the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU boosts to 1950 MHz.

Q: Which part has more shading units?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has 768 shading units, compared to 256 on the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural families and are built on different process nodes. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, and is identified as a Rembrandt+ chip. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses Xe-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process also at TSMC, and is identified as an Arrow Lake-S chip. The AMD part belongs to the Console GPU generation, while the Intel part belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) generation.

Transistor counts and die sizes differ substantially. The AMD chip carries 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 63.0 million per mm². The Intel chip carries 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, yielding a higher density of 73.3 million per mm². The Intel die is larger and packs more transistors, but the architectural use of those resources diverges sharply.

Execution resources favor the AMD part. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation units. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operation units. The AMD part also lists 12 ray tracing cores, while the Intel part lists no ray tracing cores. Neither part lists tensor cores.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory on a 128 bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, with memory clocked at 800 MHz or 6.4 Gbps effective. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses system shared memory, with a system dependent bandwidth and a system shared bus width. The AMD part therefore has a fixed, dedicated memory configuration, while the Intel part depends entirely on the host platform's memory subsystem.

Clock behavior differs as well. The AMD part has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2700 MHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1950 MHz. The AMD part runs at a higher clock at both ends of the range, which compounds its execution resource advantage.

Rates derived from these resources confirm the gap. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU achieves a pixel rate of 86.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 129.6 GTexel/s. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU achieves a pixel rate of 15.60 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 31.20 GTexel/s. Floating point throughput follows the same pattern: the AMD part delivers 4.147 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.294 TFLOPS FP16, while the Intel part delivers 998.4 GFLOPS FP32 and 1.997 TFLOPS FP16.

API support is identical on paper. Both parts list DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ across nearly every measurable specification field.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is built on a 6 nm process, while the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU is built on a 3 nm process. Both use TSMC as the foundry, but transistor counts differ: 13,100 million for AMD versus 17,800 million for Intel. Die size is 208 mm² for AMD versus 243 mm² for Intel, and transistor density is 63.0M per mm² versus 73.3M per mm².

Clock speeds differ. AMD runs at 800 MHz base and 2700 MHz boost. Intel runs at 300 MHz base and 1950 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: AMD lists 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective, while Intel lists system shared memory.

Memory configuration is fundamentally different. AMD has 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128 bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. Intel has system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Compute resources differ. AMD has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. Intel has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and no ray tracing cores.

Fill rates and throughput differ. AMD lists 86.40 GPixel/s pixel rate, 129.6 GTexel/s texture rate, 4.147 TFLOPS FP32, and 8.294 TFLOPS FP16. Intel lists 15.60 GPixel/s pixel rate, 31.20 GTexel/s texture rate, 998.4 GFLOPS FP32, and 1.997 TFLOPS FP16.

Power and physical specifications differ. AMD has a TDP of 28 W and no power connectors. Intel has a TDP of 65 W, IGP slot width, and a Ring Bus interface. Display outputs differ: AMD has 1x USB Type-C, while Intel is motherboard dependent. The AMD part was released on 2024-12-31, while the Intel part was released on 2024-10-23. The Intel part lists a predecessor, HD Graphics-M, while the AMD part has no predecessor. Both are marked as Active in production status.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU wins on raw compute resources. It has three times the shading units, three times the texture mapping units, four times the raster operation units, and a dedicated set of 12 ray tracing cores. Its FP32 throughput of 4.147 TFLOPS is more than four times the Intel part's 998.4 GFLOPS. Pixel rate is 86.40 GPixel/s versus 15.60 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 129.6 GTexel/s versus 31.20 GTexel/s. Every throughput metric in the database favors the AMD part by a wide margin.

The AMD part also wins on memory. It has 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel part relies on system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. For workloads that depend on consistent memory access, the AMD configuration provides a fixed and predictable resource.

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU wins on process technology. Its 3 nm node is more advanced than the 6 nm node used by the AMD part, and it achieves a higher transistor density at 73.3M per mm² versus 63.0M per mm². It also has a higher total transistor count at 17,800 million versus 13,100 million, despite the AMD part having far more GPU execution units.

The Intel part has a recorded benchmark score of 733 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it at the 3rd percentile. The AMD part has no recorded score, so it cannot claim a measured benchmark win. The AMD part's 50th percentile designation indicates it sits at the median of the tracked GPU distribution, but this percentile is not supported by an explicit benchmark result in the database.

For use cases involving sustained GPU compute, ray tracing, or fixed memory bandwidth, the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU offers the stronger specification set. For use cases where the host platform's shared memory and a smaller, lower-power integrated solution are sufficient, the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU fits that role, though its measured performance is at the 3rd percentile.

The Verdict

The database presents an asymmetric picture. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU has a measured 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733, a 3rd percentile standing, and a tight cluster of rivals within 2.4%. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has no benchmark score, no nearest rivals, and a 50th percentile designation. Any direct comparison of measured performance is therefore impossible from the recorded data.

What the specification data shows is a large resource gap. The AMD part leads in shading units, TMUs, ROPs, ray tracing cores, clock speeds, pixel rate, texture rate, FP32 throughput, FP16 throughput, and memory bandwidth. It has a dedicated 16 GB LPDDR5 configuration with 102.4 GB/s, while the Intel part depends on system shared memory. The Intel part leads in process node, transistor count, and transistor density, but those advantages do not translate into higher compute metrics in the recorded specifications.

The Intel part's 733 score and 3rd percentile rank suggest it belongs to a low-performance segment, with rivals like the AMD Radeon HD 6470M and NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M nearby. The AMD part's 50th percentile, while unsupported by a raw score, places it at the median of all tracked GPUs, which is a far higher standing than the Intel part's 3rd percentile.

For a buyer or integrator selecting between the two, the data points to the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU for scenarios that demand higher compute throughput, ray tracing capability, and fixed memory bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU is the choice when a smaller integrated solution with a 65 W TDP and shared memory is acceptable, and when the measured 733 score meets the workload requirement. The AMD part's 28 W TDP is lower than the Intel part's 65 W, which is notable for power-constrained designs.

The verdict from the data is clear on resources and ambiguous on measured performance. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU dominates the specification sheet across every compute and memory metric. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU offers the only recorded benchmark result in this pairing. Users who prioritize measured results have exactly one data point to consult. Users who prioritize theoretical throughput will favor the AMD part.