AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU vs Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark runs for these two parts, so the comparison rests on their theoretical peak rates and architectural capabilities. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU posts a pixel rate of 86.40 GPixel/s against 9.200 GPixel/s for the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile, a gap of roughly 9.4 times. Texture rate follows a similar pattern: 129.6 GTexel/s versus 18.40 GTexel/s, meaning the AMD part processes about 7 times more texels per second. FP32 throughput shows the largest divergence, with 8.294 TFLOPS for the AMD GPU and 588.8 GFLOPS for the Intel part, a difference of approximately 14.1 times.

The Intel part does hold one advantage in raw FP16 output. Its FP16 rate of 1,177.6 GFLOPS exceeds its FP32 rate because it uses a 2:1 ratio, while the AMD GPU delivers FP16 at the same 8.294 TFLOPS as its FP32 figure, a 1:1 ratio. That means the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile has a higher peak FP16 throughput than its own FP32, but it still sits far below the AMD part's absolute FP16 number. The AMD GPU's FP16 output is roughly 7 times higher than the Intel part's FP16 peak.

Both parts support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD GPU also includes 12 RT cores against a single RT core on the Intel part, which points to a large gap in ray tracing work. The recorded data shows no benchmark wins for either side, because no benchmark entries exist for these products in the database at present.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU uses the Hawk Point chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile uses the Wildcat Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The AMD part carries 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 142.6M per mm². Intel does not disclose transistor counts or die size for its chip, so no density figure exists in the database.

The AMD GPU has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operating units. The Intel part has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. The AMD GPU's 12 RT cores versus the Intel part's single RT core marks a major feature difference for ray tracing workloads. Neither part lists tensor cores in the database.

Memory configuration separates the two sharply. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5X on a 128-bit bus, with memory clocks at 937 MHz and 7.5 Gbps effective, yielding 119.9 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, so its memory performance scales with the host platform rather than a dedicated pool. The AMD part's base clock runs at 800 MHz with a boost of 2700 MHz. The Intel part starts at 300 MHz and boosts to 2300 MHz.

Power draw sits close: 28 W for the AMD GPU and 25 W for the Intel GPU. Both use no power connectors. The Intel part is an IGP with a slot width of "IGP" and a bus interface of "IGP", while the AMD GPU lists no bus interface. Display outputs differ as well: the AMD part provides 1x USB Type-C, while the Intel part's outputs depend on the portable device.

The release dates differ by over a year. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU entered production status in December 2024, while the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile became active in April 2026. The Intel part lists a predecessor, HD Graphics-M, while the AMD part has no predecessor or successor recorded. Both parts remain in active production. Neither has a launch MSRP in the database, and both sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, though neither has an average benchmark score yet.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU wins in every measured throughput category except FP16 ratio behavior. Its 86.40 GPixel/s fill rate suits high-resolution rasterization, where pixel output directly limits performance. Its 129.6 GTexel/s texture rate supports texture-heavy scenes, and its 8.294 TFLOPS FP32 throughput handles general compute and shader workloads. The 16 GB dedicated LPDDR5X pool with 119.9 GB/s bandwidth gives it predictable memory performance independent of the host system.

The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile wins only in the FP16-to-FP32 ratio comparison. Its 2:1 FP16 ratio means it can double its FP32 throughput when working with FP16 data, which benefits certain machine learning and media workloads that use reduced precision. Its 1,177.6 GFLOPS FP16 peak, however, remains about 7 times lower than the AMD part's FP16 output. The Intel part's system shared memory model can be an advantage in cost and simplicity for low-power portable designs, but the database records no performance numbers for that configuration.

For ray tracing, the AMD GPU's 12 RT cores versus the Intel part's single RT core indicates a clear workload split. Applications that rely on hardware ray tracing will favor the AMD part heavily. The Intel part's single RT core may still handle basic ray tracing tasks, but the data suggests it will struggle with complex scenes.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS FP32, which is about 14.1 times higher than the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile's 588.8 GFLOPS.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The AMD GPU uses 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5X on a 128-bit bus with 119.9 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel GPU uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, so its performance depends on the host platform.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both are rated for the same API feature levels.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has a 28 W TDP, while the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile has a 25 W TDP. The difference is 3 W.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD GPU has 768 shading units, while the Intel GPU has 128 shading units. That is a 6 times difference in shader count.

Q: What process nodes are used?

A: The AMD GPU is built on a 4 nm TSMC process. The Intel GPU is built on a 3 nm Intel process.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a decisive performance hierarchy. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU leads by wide margins in pixel rate, texture rate, FP32 throughput, and ray tracing hardware. Its dedicated 16 GB memory pool with fixed bandwidth removes platform variability. The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile offers lower power draw by 3 W, a smaller footprint as an IGP, and a higher FP16 ratio, but its absolute throughput numbers sit far below the AMD part in every category.

The AMD GPU suits workloads that demand sustained rasterization and compute throughput: gaming, rendering, and general GPU compute. Its 12 RT cores and 8.294 TFLOPS FP32 make it the choice for applications that push shader and ray tracing load. The Intel part fits low-power portable systems where the IGP form factor and system shared memory keep things simple, and where FP16 workloads can exploit its 2:1 ratio. But for raw performance, the database shows no contest: the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU outperforms the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile by roughly an order of magnitude in most measured metrics.

Both parts sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, but that percentile is provisional because neither has recorded benchmark scores yet. Once benchmark data populates, the AMD part's theoretical advantages should translate into higher percentile placement, assuming real-world tests reflect the peak rates.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU | Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile |

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

| Chip | Hawk Point | Wildcat Lake |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Xe3-LPG |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 25,390 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | unknown |

| Transistor Density | 142.6M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 800 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2700 MHz | 2300 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 937 MHz 7.5 Gbps effective | System Shared |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | LPDDR5X | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 119.9 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 768 | 128 |

| TMUs | 48 | 8 |

| ROPs | 32 | 4 |

| RT Cores | 12 | 1 |

| Pixel Rate | 86.40 GPixel/s | 9.200 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 129.6 GTexel/s | 18.40 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 8.294 TFLOPS | 588.8 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.294 TFLOPS (1:1) | 1,177.6 GFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 28 W | 25 W |

| Slot Width | null | IGP |

| Bus Interface | null | IGP |

| Display Outputs | 1x USB Type-C | Portable Device Dependent |

| Release Date | 2024-12-31 | 2026-04-15 |

| Predecessor | null | HD Graphics-M |

The two GPUs share identical API support, power connector requirements (none), production status (active), and lack of a launch MSRP. The AMD part's dedicated memory and higher throughput metrics define the performance gap, while the Intel part's IGP nature and newer process node define its efficiency profile. The FP16 ratio difference stands as the only metric where the Intel part shows a structural advantage over its own FP32 rate, but not over the AMD part's absolute numbers.