AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU vs Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero and no wins attributed to either side, meaning there is no measured performance data to compare directly. The absence of scores does not indicate parity; it simply reflects that no benchmark submissions have been recorded for either part in this database.

What the data does show is a significant gap in theoretical compute ceilings, which often correlates with real-world performance differences. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers 4.147 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile delivers 1.792 TFLOPS. That places the AMD part at roughly 2.3 times the raw single-precision throughput of the Intel part. In FP16, the AMD GPU reaches 8.294 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), versus 3.584 TFLOPS for the Intel GPU, maintaining the same proportional lead.

Texture and pixel throughput follow a similar pattern. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU sustains a texture rate of 129.6 GTexel/s, while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile manages 56.00 GTexel/s. Pixel fill rates are 86.40 GPixel/s for the AMD part and 28.00 GPixel/s for the Intel part. These figures indicate that the AMD GPU can process roughly twice the textured geometry and over three times the rasterized pixels per second compared to the Intel mobile graphics solution.

Clock behavior also differs substantially. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU runs at a base clock of 800 MHz and boosts to 2700 MHz. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost of 1750 MHz. The AMD part’s higher boost clock, combined with its larger execution resource pool, explains much of its compute advantage. The Intel part relies on a lower clock envelope, consistent with its 65 W TDP class, whereas the AMD part carries a 28 W TDP, making its performance-per-watt profile more favorable on paper.

Both GPUs sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, but that percentile is based on zero recorded benchmark scores, so it should be interpreted as a placeholder rather than a measured ranking. The absence of nearest rival entries for either product further confirms that no comparative performance data has been populated. For now, the head-to-head must be evaluated through architectural capability and specification deltas rather than actual benchmark outcomes.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers 4.147 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is more than double the 1.792 TFLOPS offered by the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile.

Q: What are the memory configurations for each GPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth and a system shared bus width.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has a TDP of 28 W and uses no external power connectors. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile has a TDP of 65 W and is an integrated graphics processor with a Ring Bus interface.

Q: Which GPU supports the newer DirectX version?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The AMD part also matches the Intel part with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4 support.

Q: What manufacturing process does each GPU use?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC and contains 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile uses a 10 nm process at Intel with no transistor or die size data recorded.

Q: Are there any recorded benchmark scores for these GPUs?

A: No. Both the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile have an average benchmark score of zero, and no head-to-head benchmark results are present in the database.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is based on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, implemented on the Rembrandt+ chip, and belongs to the Console GPU generation. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 13,100 million transistors packed into a 208 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 63.0M per mm². The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile is based on the Xe-LPG architecture, implemented on the Meteor Lake chip, and belongs to the Arc Graphics-M generation. It is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel, with no transistor count or die size recorded in the database.

Execution resource counts differ sharply. The AMD GPU features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation units. It also includes 12 ray tracing cores. The Intel GPU has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units, with no ray tracing core count listed. The AMD part’s larger unit counts across the board give it a structural advantage in both rasterization and ray tracing workloads.

The memory architecture also diverges. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses a dedicated 16 GB pool of LPDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus and fixed 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile uses system shared memory, where the type, bus width, and bandwidth are all system dependent. This means the Intel solution’s memory performance varies with the host platform, while the AMD solution offers a fixed, dedicated memory subsystem.

Clock behavior reflects different design priorities. The AMD GPU operates with an 800 MHz base and 2700 MHz boost, while the Intel GPU runs at 300 MHz base and 1750 MHz boost. The AMD part’s higher boost clock, combined with its larger resource pool, produces its higher fill rates and compute throughput. The Intel part’s lower clocks align with its integrated nature and higher 65 W TDP.

API support shows a notable difference in DirectX capability. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes the full set of DX12 Ultimate features. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), which is a subset that lacks some of the newer feature levels. Both GPUs support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Specification Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The AMD part is a discrete-style GPU with a 6 nm process, 13,100 million transistors, and a 208 mm² die. The Intel part is an integrated GPU on a 10 nm process with no transistor or die size data.

Clock speeds differ: AMD runs at 800 MHz base and 2700 MHz boost, while Intel runs at 300 MHz base and 1750 MHz boost. Memory differs fundamentally: AMD uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth and bus width.

Shading units: AMD has 768, Intel has 512. Texture mapping units: AMD has 48, Intel has 32. Raster operation units: AMD has 32, Intel has 16. Ray tracing cores: AMD has 12, Intel has none recorded.

Pixel rate: AMD achieves 86.40 GPixel/s, Intel achieves 28.00 GPixel/s. Texture rate: AMD achieves 129.6 GTexel/s, Intel achieves 56.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute: AMD delivers 4.147 TFLOPS, Intel delivers 1.792 TFLOPS. FP16 compute: AMD delivers 8.294 TFLOPS, Intel delivers 3.584 TFLOPS.

TDP: AMD is 28 W, Intel is 65 W. Power connectors: AMD uses none, Intel has none recorded. Bus interface: AMD has none recorded, Intel uses Ring Bus. Display outputs: AMD has 1x USB Type-C, Intel is portable device dependent.

DirectX support: AMD supports 12 Ultimate (12_2), Intel supports 12 (12_1). Release dates differ: AMD was released on 2024-12-31, Intel on 2023-12-13. The Intel part has a recorded predecessor, HD Graphics-M, while the AMD part has no predecessor listed.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU wins on every measurable compute and throughput metric recorded in the database. Its FP32 output of 4.147 TFLOPS more than doubles the Intel part’s 1.792 TFLOPS. Its FP16 output of 8.294 TFLOPS similarly exceeds the Intel part’s 3.584 TFLOPS. These advantages make the AMD GPU the stronger choice for workloads that rely on raw shader throughput, such as general 3D rendering and compute-heavy effects.

The AMD part also wins on pixel and texture processing. Its 86.40 GPixel/s pixel rate is over three times the Intel part’s 28.00 GPixel/s, which favors the AMD GPU in high-resolution rasterization scenarios. Its 129.6 GTexel/s texture rate more than doubles the Intel part’s 56.00 GTexel/s, benefiting texture-heavy scenes and filtering workloads. The AMD part’s 12 ray tracing cores add a capability that the Intel part does not record, making the AMD GPU the only one of the two with dedicated ray tracing hardware.

The AMD part wins on memory configuration. Its dedicated 16 GB LPDDR5 pool with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth provides predictable, fixed performance, while the Intel part depends on system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. This gives the AMD GPU a consistent advantage in memory-bound scenarios.

The AMD part also wins on power efficiency. Its 28 W TDP is less than half of the Intel part’s 65 W TDP, while delivering significantly higher throughput. This makes the AMD GPU more favorable for thermally constrained or battery-powered systems.

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile wins on integration and platform simplicity. As an integrated GPU with a Ring Bus interface, it requires no separate memory allocation and uses system shared memory, which can simplify system design. Its lower base clock of 300 MHz suggests a more conservative power profile at idle, though its 65 W TDP is higher under load. The Intel part also has an earlier release date, indicating it has been available in the market for a longer period.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a clear performance hierarchy. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU dominates the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile across every throughput metric in the database. It delivers more than double the FP32 compute, more than double the texture rate, more than three times the pixel rate, and a dedicated 16 GB memory pool with fixed bandwidth. It also supports a newer DirectX version and includes ray tracing hardware.

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile is an integrated solution with system shared memory, lower clock speeds, and roughly half the shading units of the AMD part. Its only structural advantages are its integration into the host processor via Ring Bus and its earlier availability. For any workload where GPU compute, rendering, or memory bandwidth matters, the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is the stronger part based on the specification data.

The 50th percentile ranking for both GPUs in the all-GPU database reflects the absence of recorded benchmark scores rather than measured equivalence. Until benchmark data is populated, the specification differences provide the only basis for comparison, and those differences favor the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU decisively. The AMD part’s combination of higher clocks, more execution units, dedicated memory, and lower TDP makes it the superior choice for performance-sensitive applications. The Intel part remains a viable integrated option for systems where discrete-class memory and higher power draw are not acceptable.