AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU vs Intel Arc A310E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU or the Intel Arc A310E, and no head-to-head benchmark entries exist for this pairing. Both parts sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of zero for each. This means the comparison must be built from architectural and specification data rather than from measured performance deltas.

The most decisive difference between the two is in raw compute throughput. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS. That puts the AMD part at roughly 2.7 times the single-precision throughput of the Intel part. In FP16 work, the gap shifts: the AMD part maintains 8.294 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part reaches 6.144 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. So for workloads that can exploit packed FP16, the Intel part gets much closer, but for standard FP32 rendering paths, the AMD part is decisively ahead.

Pixel and texture throughput also favor AMD. The Ryzen Z2 GPU achieves 86.40 GPixel/s and 129.6 GTexel/s, versus 32.00 GPixel/s and 64.00 GTexel/s for the Arc A310E. That is a 2.7x advantage in pixel fill and just over 2x in texture fill. The AMD part also has more texture mapping units (48 vs 32) and more render output units (32 vs 16), which explains the fill rate advantage.

Ray tracing hardware differs as well. The AMD part includes 12 RT cores, while the Intel part includes 6 RT cores. Neither part is positioned as a high-end ray tracing solution, but the AMD part has double the RT hardware, which should translate to better ray traversal throughput in supported titles, assuming driver overhead is comparable.

Memory bandwidth is close, but the configuration differs sharply. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5X on a 128-bit bus, delivering 119.9 GB/s. The Intel Arc A310E uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 124.0 GB/s. The Intel part has a slight bandwidth advantage (about 3.4% higher), but the AMD part has four times the memory capacity. For frame buffering at high resolutions or for workloads with large working sets, the AMD part has a clear capacity edge.

Clock behavior is also distinct. The AMD part has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2700 MHz, a wide dynamic range that suggests aggressive power management. The Intel part runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost, with no boost headroom above its base rate. The memory clocks differ correspondingly: the AMD memory runs at 937 MHz (7.5 Gbps effective), while the Intel memory runs at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective).

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU is the stronger compute part in nearly every category that matters for rendering throughput. It leads in FP32 TFLOPS, pixel rate, texture rate, RT core count, shading units (768 vs 768, a tie), TMUs, and ROPs. The Intel Arc A310E leads only in memory bandwidth (124.0 GB/s vs 119.9 GB/s), FP16 throughput under a 2:1 ratio, and physical form factor flexibility.

For a builder prioritizing raw graphics performance in a low-power envelope, the AMD part is the clear choice from the recorded data. It delivers more than double the FP32 throughput at a 28 W TDP, compared to 75 W for the Intel part. The Intel part consumes nearly 2.7 times the power while delivering less than half the FP32 throughput. That is a lopsided efficiency comparison.

The Intel Arc A310E makes sense only in scenarios where its specific attributes matter more than compute throughput. Its 4 GB GDDR6 memory provides 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth, slightly higher than the AMD part, and its 6 nm process node with a 2000 MHz flat clock may offer more predictable thermal behavior in constrained enclosures. Its single-slot, 168 mm length, 69 mm height, and 20 mm width make it a compact card for small form factor systems, and its four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs support multi-display setups that the AMD part's single USB Type-C output cannot match.

Neither part has a recorded benchmark score, so the verdict rests on specification analysis. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU is the more capable graphics processor by a wide margin in compute, fill rate, and memory capacity. The Intel Arc A310E is the more practical add-in card for multi-display workstations with limited space.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU wins in scenarios that demand high shader throughput and large memory buffers. Its 8.294 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 86.40 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 129.6 GTexel/s texture rate make it suitable for gaming at 1080p or 1440p with modern graphics features, assuming the 16 GB memory capacity is sufficient for large textures and high-resolution frame buffers. The 12 RT cores provide a meaningful ray tracing capability that the Intel part's 6 RT cores cannot match. The 28 W TDP also makes it viable for handheld or low-power embedded designs where thermal headroom is tight.

The Intel Arc A310E wins in scenarios that prioritize memory bandwidth, FP16 throughput, or display connectivity. Its 124.0 GB/s bandwidth edges out the AMD part by 4.1 GB/s, which can matter in bandwidth-bound compute kernels. Its 6.144 TFLOPS FP16 performance with a 2:1 ratio gives it an advantage in workloads that use packed half-precision math, such as certain AI inference or image processing tasks. The four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs support up to four independent displays, while the AMD part offers only a single USB Type-C output. The Intel part is also an end-of-life product with a known successor (Battlemage) and a known predecessor (Xe Graphics), so it fits into a defined product lifecycle.

Neither part has recorded benchmark wins in the database, so the use-case split is derived entirely from the specification sheet.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS. The AMD part is about 2.7 times higher.

Q: How does memory capacity compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5X on a 128-bit bus. The Intel Arc A310E has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus. The AMD part has four times the capacity.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has 124.0 GB/s, slightly higher than the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU's 119.9 GB/s. The difference is about 4.1 GB/s.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has a 28 W TDP. The Intel Arc A310E has a 75 W TDP. The Intel part draws nearly 2.7 times the power.

Q: How many display outputs does each GPU have?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has one USB Type-C output. The Intel Arc A310E has four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs.

Q: What are the ray tracing capabilities?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU includes 12 RT cores. The Intel Arc A310E includes 6 RT cores. The AMD part has double the RT hardware.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs use different architectures built on different process nodes. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU uses RDNA 3.0 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC, with the chip codename Hawk Point. The Intel Arc A310E uses Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm process from TSMC, with the chip codename DG2-128. The AMD part is classified as a Console GPU (AMD) generation product, while the Intel part belongs to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation.

Transistor counts differ substantially. The AMD chip contains 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 142.6M per mm². The Intel chip contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving a density of 45.9M per mm². The AMD part packs over 3.5 times the transistors into a slightly larger die, reflecting the denser 4 nm process.

Shading units are equal at 768 for both parts, but the surrounding hardware differs. The AMD part has 48 TMUs and 32 ROPs, while the Intel part has 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs. The AMD part has 12 RT cores, the Intel part has 6. Neither part lists tensor cores.

FP16 execution differs in ratio. The AMD part runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 8.294 TFLOPS. The Intel part runs FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, delivering 6.144 TFLOPS FP16 while FP32 is 3.072 TFLOPS. This indicates different ALU designs: AMD appears to use uniform shader cores, while Intel uses a packed execution path.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so the API feature set is identical.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU and the Intel Arc A310E, based solely on the recorded data:

• Manufacturer: AMD vs Intel
• Chip: Hawk Point vs DG2-128
• Architecture: RDNA 3.0 vs Xe-HPG
• Generation: Console GPU (AMD) vs Alchemist (Arc 3)
• Process node: 4 nm vs 6 nm
• Transistors: 25,390 million vs 7,200 million
• Die size: 178 mm² vs 157 mm²
• Transistor density: 142.6M / mm² vs 45.9M / mm²
• Base clock: 800 MHz vs 2000 MHz
• Boost clock: 2700 MHz vs 2000 MHz
• Memory clock: 937 MHz (7.5 Gbps effective) vs 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: 16 GB vs 4 GB
• Memory type: LPDDR5X vs GDDR6
• Memory bus width: 128 bit vs 64 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 119.9 GB/s vs 124.0 GB/s
• TMUs: 48 vs 32
• ROPs: 32 vs 16
• RT cores: 12 vs 6
• Pixel rate: 86.40 GPixel/s vs 32.00 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 129.6 GTexel/s vs 64.00 GTexel/s
• FP32: 8.294 TFLOPS vs 3.072 TFLOPS
• FP16: 8.294 TFLOPS (1:1) vs 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 28 W vs 75 W
• Slot width: not listed vs Single-slot
• Suggested PSU: not listed vs 250 W
• Bus interface: not listed vs PCIe 4.0 x8
• Display outputs: 1x USB Type-C vs 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0
• Dimensions: not listed vs 168 mm length, 69 mm height, 20 mm width
• Production status: Active vs End-of-life
• Release date: 2024-12-31 vs 2024-03-31
• Predecessor: not listed vs Xe Graphics
• Successor: not listed vs Battlemage

The two parts share shading unit count (768), API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4), power connector requirement (none for both), and percentile ranking (50th for both).