AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU vs Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural identities of these two GPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is a Console GPU built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, using a 6 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 is a Data Center GPU (Ponte Vecchio) built on Generation 12.5 architecture, using a 10 nm process at Intel.

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 uses 128 GB of HBM2e on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 3.28 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has a TDP of 28 W and requires no power connectors. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 has a TDP of 600 W, requires a 1000 W suggested PSU, and is an OAM Module form factor.

Q: Which GPU has a higher shading unit count?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 has 16384 shading units, compared to 768 shading units on the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU.

Q: What are the FP32 performance figures?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers 4.147 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 delivers 52.43 TFLOPS of FP32 performance.

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 supports DirectX 12 (12_1).

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD part uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 208 mm² and 13,100 million transistors. The Intel part uses Generation 12.5 architecture, built on a 10 nm process at Intel, with a die size of 1280 mm² and 100,000 million transistors.

The transistor density figures reveal distinct approaches: the AMD chip has a density of 63.0M transistors per mm², while the Intel chip has a density of 78.1M transistors per mm². The Intel GPU's far larger die and transistor count reflect its data center orientation, where massive parallel throughput takes precedence over power efficiency.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses LPDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus, yielding 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 uses HBM2e memory with an 8192-bit bus, yielding 3.28 TB/s of bandwidth. This 32x difference in memory bandwidth aligns with the Intel part's role as a high-throughput compute accelerator.

The AMD GPU includes 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. The Intel GPU includes 16384 shading units, 1024 TMUs, 0 ROPs, and 128 ray tracing cores. The absence of ROPs on the Intel part, combined with a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, indicates that it is not designed for traditional rasterization-based graphics output. It also has no display outputs, whereas the AMD part has a single USB Type-C output.

The AMD GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel GPU supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan support listed. The AMD part's support for the newer DirectX feature level and Vulkan suggests a more complete graphics API stack, despite its much lower raw compute capability.

The clock speeds also diverge sharply. The AMD GPU has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2700 MHz. The Intel GPU has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 1600 MHz. The AMD part's higher boost clock partially compensates for its smaller execution resource pool.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 is overwhelmingly more powerful in raw compute metrics. Its FP32 throughput of 52.43 TFLOPS is more than 12 times that of the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU's 4.147 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 1,638.4 GTexel/s is more than 12 times the AMD part's 129.6 GTexel/s. Its memory bandwidth of 3.28 TB/s is roughly 32 times the AMD part's 102.4 GB/s.

However, these two GPUs are not intended for the same workloads. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is a 28 W console-oriented chip with display output, a compact design, and no external power connectors. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 is a 600 W OAM module with no display outputs, requiring a 1000 W suggested PSU, clearly designed for server racks and compute clusters.

For a system requiring graphics output, Vulkan support, or DirectX 12 Ultimate features, the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is the only viable choice between the two. For massive parallel compute workloads such as scientific simulation or data center inference, the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 delivers the necessary throughput, though at a much higher power cost. The AMD part's 28 W TDP versus the Intel part's 600 W TDP represents a 21x difference in power draw.

Neither GPU has recorded benchmark scores in the database, and both sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs. The decisive differentiation comes from their specifications and intended deployment contexts.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU | Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Generation 12.5 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 13,100 million | 100,000 million |

| Die Size | 208 mm² | 1280 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 63.0M / mm² | 78.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 800 MHz | 900 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2700 MHz | 1600 MHz |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | LPDDR5 | HBM2e |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 8192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 3.28 TB/s |

| Memory Clock | 800 MHz 6.4 Gbps effective | 1600 MHz 3.2 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 768 | 16384 |

| TMUs | 48 | 1024 |

| ROPs | 32 | 0 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 12 | 128 |

| Pixel Rate | 86.40 GPixel/s | 0 MPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 129.6 GTexel/s | 1,638.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.147 TFLOPS | 52.43 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.294 TFLOPS (2:1) | 52.43 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 28 W | 600 W |

| Slot Width | Not specified | OAM Module |

| Power Connectors | None | Not specified |

| Suggested PSU | Not specified | 1000 W |

| Bus Interface | Not specified | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x USB Type-C | No outputs |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | Not specified |

| Release Date | 2024-12-31 | 2023-01-09 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark runs for these two GPUs, and neither has any individual benchmark scores listed. The analysis therefore relies entirely on the specification-level measurements recorded in the database.

The most decisive specification advantage belongs to the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 in FP32 throughput. At 52.43 TFLOPS versus 4.147 TFLOPS for the AMD part, the Intel GPU delivers roughly 12.6 times the single-precision compute throughput. This is the clearest differentiator between the two products.

The Intel GPU also dominates in memory bandwidth. Its 3.28 TB/s is approximately 32 times the AMD part's 102.4 GB/s. The memory capacity difference is equally stark: 128 GB versus 16 GB, an 8x advantage for Intel.

The texture rate follows the same pattern. The Intel GPU's 1,638.4 GTexel/s is roughly 12.6 times the AMD part's 129.6 GTexel/s. The pixel rate, however, reverses: the AMD GPU produces 86.40 GPixel/s while the Intel GPU produces 0 MPixel/s due to having no ROPs.

The FP16 comparison shows a different ratio. The AMD GPU achieves 8.294 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32. The Intel GPU achieves 52.43 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 throughput equals its FP32 throughput. The Intel part still leads in absolute FP16 terms by roughly 6.3 times, but the AMD part's FP16 advantage over its own FP32 is proportionally larger.

The clock speed comparison favors AMD. The AMD GPU's boost clock of 2700 MHz is 1100 MHz higher than the Intel GPU's 1600 MHz boost clock. This higher clock rate helps the AMD part achieve meaningful throughput despite its much smaller execution resource pool.

The ray tracing core counts differ by roughly 10.7 times in favor of Intel, with 128 cores versus 12 cores. However, the AMD part's support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 suggests a more complete graphics feature set, which may matter more for interactive rendering workloads than raw RT core counts alone.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 wins decisively in all raw compute throughput categories: FP32, FP16, texture rate, shading units, TMUs, ray tracing cores, memory bandwidth, and memory capacity. Its 600 W TDP and OAM Module form factor position it for rack-mounted data center deployments where power density and massive parallel throughput are the priorities.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU wins in the categories that matter for client-side graphics and power-constrained systems: it has a higher boost clock (2700 MHz vs 1600 MHz), a functional pixel pipeline with 32 ROPs and 86.40 GPixel/s, a display output via USB Type-C, a much lower TDP of 28 W, no power connector requirement, and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel part has no display outputs and no Vulkan support.

The AMD part's FP16 performance of 8.294 TFLOPS, achieved at a 2:1 ratio, indicates efficient half-precision execution relative to its FP32 capability. The Intel part's FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio means it treats FP16 and FP32 with equal priority, which is typical of compute-oriented accelerators.

The release dates show a chronological gap: the Intel GPU launched on 2023-01-09, while the AMD GPU launched on 2024-12-31. The Intel part has a listed successor, H3C Graphics, while the AMD part has no successor listed. Both remain in active production status.

For a system builder focused on graphics output, low power draw, and modern API support, the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is the only functional choice between these two, given the Intel part's lack of display outputs and ROPs. For a data center operator focused on maximum FP32 and FP16 throughput, memory bandwidth, and memory capacity, the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 is the clear selection, accepting its 600 W power draw and 1000 W PSU requirement.