AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU vs Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile shows no direct head-to-head benchmark entries, and the wins tally is zero for each side. However, the database does provide raw compute and throughput figures that allow a clear quantitative separation between the two parts. The most decisive difference appears in raw shading throughput: the AMD part delivers 4.147 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel part delivers 384.0 GFLOPS. That places the AMD GPU at roughly 10.8 times the FP32 throughput of the Intel chip, a margin that will dominate any workload relying on general-purpose shader execution.

Texture rate follows the same pattern. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU reaches 129.6 GTexel/s, whereas the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile manages 12.00 GTexel/s. That is a 10.8-fold advantage for the AMD part. Pixel rate is similarly lopsided: 86.40 GPixel/s on the AMD side versus 4.000 GPixel/s on the Intel side, a 21.6-fold difference. The pixel rate gap is larger than the texture or FP32 gaps because the Intel part has only 4 ROPs to the AMD part's 32 ROPs, so the fill-rate disadvantage compounds.

Clock speeds also differ substantially. The AMD chip has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost of 2700 MHz, while the Intel chip runs at a base of 300 MHz and a boost of 1000 MHz. Even at base clocks, the AMD part runs 2.67 times higher than the Intel boost clock. The memory subsystem reinforces this: the AMD GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel part uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The database lists no fixed bandwidth figure for the Intel side, but the architectural difference is clear: dedicated high-bandwidth memory versus shared system memory.

In terms of API support, both parts expose DirectX 12 and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The AMD part also adds 12 ray-tracing cores, which the Intel part lacks entirely. That gives the AMD GPU a feature-level advantage in ray-traced content, even before considering the raw compute gap.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU wins in every measured compute and throughput category recorded in the database. Its FP32 rate of 4.147 TFLOPS, texture rate of 129.6 GTexel/s, and pixel rate of 86.40 GPixel/s are all far above the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile's corresponding figures of 384.0 GFLOPS, 12.00 GTexel/s, and 4.000 GPixel/s. The AMD part also has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, versus 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, and 4 ROPs on the Intel chip. That is a 4x advantage in shader count, a 4x advantage in TMUs, and an 8x advantage in ROPs.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile wins in power consumption and integration footprint. Its TDP is 6 W, compared to the AMD part's 28 W. The Intel part is an IGP with a ring bus interface and portable-device-dependent display outputs, meaning it consumes far less power and occupies no separate slot. For workloads that are extremely light, such as basic display output or low-resolution 2D rendering, the Intel part uses a fraction of the power. However, the database shows no benchmark wins for the Intel part, and its compute rates are so low that any meaningful 3D workload would favor the AMD GPU by a wide margin.

The ray-tracing category is exclusive to the AMD part. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU includes 12 RT cores, while the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile lists null RT cores. Any ray-traced scene, even a simple one, will only run on the AMD part. The Intel chip has no hardware acceleration for this path.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm TSMC process. The chip, codenamed Rembrandt+, integrates 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 63.0M per mm². The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses Xe-LP architecture on a 10 nm Intel process, with transistor count and die size listed as unknown in the database. The process node difference (6 nm versus 10 nm) gives the AMD part a density advantage, though the Intel part is a much smaller design by virtue of its 6 W TDP.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The AMD GPU has 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part uses system-shared memory with a system-shared bus width and system-dependent bandwidth. This means the AMD part has predictable, fixed memory performance, while the Intel part's memory throughput depends entirely on the host platform's memory configuration. The AMD part's memory clock is listed as 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective, whereas the Intel part lists no fixed memory clock.

The compute units differ in scale. The AMD part has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with 12 RT cores. The Intel part has 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, and 4 ROPs, with no RT cores. The FP16 performance follows the FP32 ratio: the AMD part delivers 8.294 TFLOPS (2:1), while the Intel part delivers 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1). Both parts support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the AMD part's DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support exceeds the Intel part's DirectX 12 (12_1) support, indicating the AMD GPU supports newer DXR and mesh-shader features.

Power delivery also differs. The AMD part has a 28 W TDP with no power connectors, suggesting it is a low-power mobile or console-oriented chip that draws its power from the motherboard. The Intel part has a 6 W TDP and is classified as an IGP, with a ring bus interface. The display outputs differ as well: the AMD part lists 1x USB Type-C, while the Intel part lists portable-device-dependent outputs. Both parts are listed as Active in production status with the same release date of 2024-12-31 in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers 4.147 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile delivers 384.0 GFLOPS. The AMD part is roughly 10.8 times faster in this metric.

Q: Does the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile support ray tracing?

A: No. The database lists null RT cores for the Intel part. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU includes 12 ray-tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes DXR support.

Q: What are the memory configurations of these two GPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth and no fixed memory size or bus width.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has a TDP of 28 W, while the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has a TDP of 6 W. The Intel part is an IGP with no power connectors, and the AMD part also lists no power connectors, but the AMD part draws nearly five times the power.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and texture units?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. The AMD part has 4 times the shaders and TMUs, and 8 times the ROPs.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is fabricated on a 6 nm TSMC process. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is fabricated on a 10 nm Intel process. The AMD part also integrates 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, while the Intel part's transistor count and die size are unknown.

The Verdict

The benchmark data shows a complete performance hierarchy: the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is in a different class from the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile. With 4.147 TFLOPS versus 384.0 GFLOPS of FP32 throughput, a 21.6-fold pixel-rate advantage, and 12 dedicated RT cores where the Intel part has none, the AMD part is the only viable option for any 3D rendering, gaming, or compute workload. Its 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth removes the system-memory dependency that limits the Intel part.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is not without a role. Its 6 W TDP and IGP classification make it appropriate for ultra-low-power portable devices where display output and basic 2D acceleration are the only requirements. The database shows no benchmark wins for the Intel part, and its pixel rate of 4.000 GPixel/s and texture rate of 12.00 GTexel/s place it far below the AMD part's 86.40 GPixel/s and 129.6 GTexel/s. For users who need ray tracing, the AMD part is the only choice, as it is the sole GPU among the two with RT cores.

The percentile data places both parts at the 50th percentile against all GPUs, but that figure reflects the absence of benchmark scores rather than parity in capability. The recorded compute specifications make the gap unambiguous. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU should be selected for any workload that involves rendering, shading, or compute acceleration. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile should be selected only when power draw is the dominant constraint and the workload is limited to basic graphics output.