AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU vs Intel Arc A380E x2 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct benchmark comparisons between the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU and the Intel Arc A380E x2. Both products hold a percentile rank of 50 against all GPUs in the database, indicating they sit at the median of the performance distribution. Neither unit has an average benchmark score recorded, so the head-to-head comparison relies entirely on architectural and specification analysis rather than measured performance deltas.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is double the 4.096 TFLOPS recorded for the Intel Arc A380E x2. This gives the AMD part a 102.5% advantage in raw single-precision floating-point throughput. The AMD unit also leads in pixel fill rate at 86.40 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s, a 35% margin. Texture rate is nearly identical, with the AMD part at 129.6 GTexel/s and the Intel part at 128.0 GTexel/s, a difference of only 1.25%.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 counters in memory bandwidth, delivering 186.0 GB/s against the AMD unit's 119.9 GB/s, a 55.1% advantage. The Intel part also has more shading units (1024 versus 768) and more texture mapping units (64 versus 48). In FP16 throughput, the Intel part reaches 8.192 TFLOPS, essentially matching the AMD part's 8.294 TFLOPS, despite the AMD unit having a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio and the Intel part using a 2:1 ratio.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 operates at a higher base and boost clock of 2000 MHz, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2700 MHz. The AMD part's boost clock exceeds the Intel part's fixed clock by 35%. The AMD unit also leads in ray tracing cores, with 12 RT cores against 8 for the Intel part.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, using the Hawk Point chip, and is classified as a Console GPU generation product. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-128 chip, belonging to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. Both are manufactured by TSMC, but on different process nodes: the AMD part uses 4 nm, while the Intel part uses 6 nm. This node difference contributes to the AMD unit's substantially higher transistor count of 25,390 million versus 7,200 million for the Intel part. The AMD die measures 178 mm² compared to 157 mm² for the Intel die, giving the AMD part a transistor density of 142.6 million transistors per mm², versus 45.9 million per mm² for the Intel part.

Memory architecture differs significantly. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5X on a 128-bit bus, with memory clocked at 937 MHz (7.5 Gbps effective). The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective). Despite the smaller bus and lower capacity, the Intel part achieves higher bandwidth due to faster memory clocks. The AMD part's power connectors are listed as "None," while the Intel part requires a single 6-pin connector. The Intel unit has a suggested PSU rating of 300 W, while the AMD part has no suggested PSU listed.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 is a single-slot card measuring 265 mm in length, 127 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has no dimensions recorded. Display outputs differ: the AMD part has a single USB Type-C output, while the Intel part provides eight mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The Intel part uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the AMD part has no bus interface listed.

Both products support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part has a TDP of 28 W, while the Intel part has a TDP of 130 W, a 4.6x difference in thermal design power. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU is marked as Active in production, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 is End-of-life. The Intel part lists its predecessor as Xe Graphics and its successor as Battlemage; the AMD part lists no predecessor or successor.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU wins in raw FP32 compute, FP16 compute, pixel fill rate, and ray tracing core count. Its 8.294 TFLOPS FP32 output and 86.40 GPixel/s pixel rate make it the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads that rely on single-precision arithmetic and rasterization throughput. The 12 RT cores give it an edge in ray-traced rendering tasks, assuming software can leverage the RDNA 3.0 architecture effectively. The 16 GB memory capacity provides a substantial buffer for large assets, and the 28 W TDP indicates a highly power-efficient design suitable for constrained power envelopes.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 wins in memory bandwidth, with 186.0 GB/s versus 119.9 GB/s, and in raw shading unit count, with 1024 versus 768. The higher bandwidth supports texture-heavy scenes and data-intensive workloads that saturate memory throughput. The 2000 MHz fixed clock ensures consistent performance without boost variability. The eight mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs make it suited for multi-display configurations, and the PCIe 4.0 x8 interface provides a modern bus connection. The single-slot form factor and 265 mm length give it a specific physical footprint that may fit certain chassis designs.

The texture rate is effectively tied, with 129.6 GTexel/s for the AMD part and 128.0 GTexel/s for the Intel part, a 1.25% difference that falls within measurement noise. The FP16 output is also nearly identical, with the AMD part at 8.294 TFLOPS and the Intel part at 8.192 TFLOPS, a 1.24% difference. These near-parity metrics mean neither unit has a decisive advantage in texture-heavy or FP16-optimized workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is double the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc A380E x2.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 has a memory bandwidth of 186.0 GB/s, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has 119.9 GB/s, giving the Intel part a 55.1% advantage.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings for each GPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has a TDP of 28 W, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 has a TDP of 130 W.

Q: How many ray tracing cores does each GPU have?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has 12 RT cores, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 has 8 RT cores.

Q: What process nodes are used for each GPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU uses a 4 nm process node, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 uses a 6 nm process node. Both are manufactured by TSMC.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 has 1024 shading units, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has 768 shading units.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU is positioned for compute-heavy applications where FP32 throughput, pixel fill rate, and ray tracing capability matter most. Its 8.294 TFLOPS FP32 output, 86.40 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 12 RT cores make it the stronger compute performer. The 16 GB LPDDR5X memory capacity and 28 W TDP suggest a design optimized for power efficiency and large memory footprints. The Active production status indicates ongoing availability.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 is positioned for memory-bandwidth-sensitive workloads and multi-display environments. Its 186.0 GB/s bandwidth, 1024 shading units, and 64 TMUs make it competitive in texture-heavy scenarios. The eight mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs and PCIe 4.0 x8 interface give it a distinct connectivity advantage. However, its End-of-life production status and higher TDP of 130 W may limit its appeal in new deployments.

Users requiring maximum FP32 performance, ray tracing capability, and power efficiency should select the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU. Users requiring higher memory bandwidth, multi-display output, and a conventional PCIe card form factor should select the Intel Arc A380E x2. The near-identical texture rates and FP16 performance mean that those specific workloads will not differentiate the two parts.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU | Intel Arc A380E x2 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Xe-HPG |

| Generation | Console GPU (AMD) | Alchemist (Arc 3) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 25,390 million | 7,200 million |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 157 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 142.6M / mm² | 45.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 800 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2700 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 937 MHz 7.5 Gbps effective | 1937 MHz 15.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 6 GB |

| Memory Type | LPDDR5X | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 96 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 119.9 GB/s | 186.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 48 | 64 |

| ROPs | 32 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 12 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 86.40 GPixel/s | 64.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 129.6 GTexel/s | 128.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 8.294 TFLOPS | 4.096 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.294 TFLOPS (1:1) | 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 28 W | 130 W |

| Slot Width | Not listed | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | Not listed | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x USB Type-C | 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 265 mm 10.4 inches, 127 mm 5 inches, 20 mm 0.8 inches |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2024-12-31 | 2024-03-31 |

| Predecessor | Not listed | Xe Graphics |

| Successor | Not listed | Battlemage |