AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU vs Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no head-to-head benchmark results are available for this pairing. The database contains zero benchmark entries for both the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU and the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile, and the win count stands at 0 for each side. Consequently, direct performance comparisons must be derived from the specification sheets and throughput calculations rather than measured application scores.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, a figure that is exactly 6 times the 1,382.4 GFLOPS produced by the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile. In raw shading throughput, the AMD part operates with 768 shading units against 384 on the Intel side, a 2:1 ratio that aligns with the FP32 difference. Pixel throughput favors AMD decisively: 86.40 GPixel/s versus 14.40 GPixel/s, a 6x gap that reflects both the higher ROP count (32 versus 8) and the much faster clock envelope.

Texture rate tells a similar story. The AMD processor sustains 129.6 GTexel/s from its 48 TMUs, while Intel manages 43.20 GTexel/s from 24 TMUs. The AMD advantage here is exactly 3x, a consequence of the boost clock difference (2700 MHz versus 1800 MHz) combined with the doubled TMU count.

Memory bandwidth separates the two even more sharply. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5X on a 128-bit bus, yielding 119.9 GB/s. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile relies on system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent, so no fixed number can be cited. In practice, the AMD part has a dedicated, quantified bandwidth figure, while the Intel part's memory throughput is contingent on the host platform's configuration.

Clock behavior also diverges. The AMD chip idles at 800 MHz and boosts to 2700 MHz. The Intel chip starts at 300 MHz and reaches 1800 MHz. The AMD boost clock is 50% higher than Intel's, and the AMD base clock is 2.67x higher. These clock ratios compound with the architectural differences to produce the throughput gaps noted above.

FP16 performance is an interesting inversion. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU lists FP16 at 8.294 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, meaning no dedicated half-precision acceleration path. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile lists FP16 at 2.765 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, indicating that its FP16 throughput is half its FP32 rate. While AMD's absolute FP16 number is higher, Intel's 2:1 ratio shows a more efficient path for half-precision workloads relative to its own FP32 capability.

DirectX feature level also separates the two. AMD supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while Intel supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both expose OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part includes 12 ray tracing cores; the Intel part lists no ray tracing cores in the database. This indicates a hardware ray tracing capability on AMD that is absent from the Intel specification record.

The Verdict

The data indicates the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU is the stronger part across every measured throughput metric. In FP32 compute, it is 6x ahead of the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile. In pixel fill rate, it is 6x ahead. In texture fill rate, it is 3x ahead. The AMD part also doubles the shading unit count and quadruples the ROP count.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU carries 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5X memory with a fixed 119.9 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part shares system memory and has no fixed bandwidth number. For workloads that depend on consistent memory throughput, the AMD configuration offers a concrete advantage.

The AMD part's DirectX 12 Ultimate support and 12 ray tracing cores make it the only one of the two with hardware ray tracing capability listed. The Intel part stops at DirectX 12 (12_1) and has no ray tracing cores recorded.

The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile does hold one advantage: its FP16 ratio is 2:1, meaning half-precision throughput is reached at half the FP32 rate, whereas AMD's FP16 ratio is 1:1, indicating no separate FP16 acceleration. In absolute terms, however, AMD's FP16 number of 8.294 TFLOPS still exceeds Intel's 2.765 TFLOPS.

Both parts share a 28 W TDP, and both are listed as Active in production status. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU was released on 2024-12-31, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile was released on 2023-12-13.

For any user choosing strictly on the recorded data, the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU is the clear selection. It wins on compute, pixel throughput, texture throughput, memory configuration, and API feature level. The Intel part is suitable for scenarios where system shared memory is the only option and where the 2:1 FP16 ratio matters more than absolute FP16 throughput.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS, which is exactly 6 times the 1,382.4 GFLOPS of the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile.

Q: How do the pixel fill rates compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU achieves 86.40 GPixel/s, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile achieves 14.40 GPixel/s. The AMD part is 6x faster in pixel throughput.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile have ray tracing cores?

A: No, the database records no ray tracing cores for the Intel part. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU includes 12 ray tracing cores.

Q: What memory configurations does each GPU use?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5X on a 128-bit bus with 119.9 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU boosts to 2700 MHz, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile boosts to 1800 MHz.

Q: Which GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1).

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every recorded specification field.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU uses a 4 nm process node from TSMC, with 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 142.6M per mm². The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile uses a 10 nm process node from Intel, with no transistor count, die size, or density recorded.

Clock speeds differ: AMD runs at 800 MHz base and 2700 MHz boost, while Intel runs at 300 MHz base and 1800 MHz boost. AMD's memory clock is 937 MHz with 7.5 Gbps effective, while Intel's memory clock is listed as system shared.

Memory capacity, type, bus width, and bandwidth all differ. AMD has 16 GB LPDDR5X, 128-bit bus, 119.9 GB/s. Intel has system shared memory, system shared bus width, and system dependent bandwidth.

The compute units differ: AMD has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. Intel has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores recorded.

Pixel and texture rates differ: AMD at 86.40 GPixel/s and 129.6 GTexel/s; Intel at 14.40 GPixel/s and 43.20 GTexel/s.

FP32 and FP16 values differ: AMD at 8.294 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (1:1); Intel at 1,382.4 GFLOPS FP32 and 2.765 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1).

The TDP is identical at 28 W for both. The Intel part is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface, while the AMD part has no slot width or bus interface recorded. AMD's display output is 1x USB Type-C, while Intel's is portable device dependent. AMD has no power connectors, and Intel's power connector field is null.

DirectX support differs: AMD at 12 Ultimate (12_2), Intel at 12 (12_1). OpenGL and Vulkan are the same for both: 4.6 and 1.4 respectively.

Release dates differ: AMD on 2024-12-31, Intel on 2023-12-13. Intel's predecessor is HD Graphics-M; AMD has no predecessor recorded. Neither has a successor recorded.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU is built on the Hawk Point chip using RDNA 3.0 architecture, classified under Console GPU (AMD) generation. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile uses the Meteor Lake chip with Xe-LPG architecture, classified under Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) generation.

The process node difference is substantial: AMD uses 4 nm TSMC fabrication, while Intel uses 10 nm Intel fabrication. The AMD die contains 25,390 million transistors across 178 mm², with no comparable die data for Intel.

Ray tracing support is a major architectural split. AMD's RDNA 3.0 includes 12 dedicated ray tracing cores. Intel's Xe-LPG architecture in this mobile variant records no ray tracing cores, and its DirectX 12 (12_1) feature level is below the DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) profile that AMD supports. This means AMD's architecture is positioned for hardware-accelerated ray tracing workloads, while Intel's is not listed with that capability.

The FP16 execution model differs. AMD's RDNA 3.0 achieves FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning the same execution units process both precisions at equal rates. Intel's Xe-LPG achieves FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning FP16 throughput is half of FP32, which indicates a different datapath arrangement.

Memory architecture diverges completely. AMD uses dedicated 16 GB LPDDR5X with a 128-bit bus and a fixed 119.9 GB/s bandwidth. Intel uses system shared memory with a ring bus interface, and bandwidth is system dependent. The AMD approach provides predictable memory performance, while the Intel approach relies on the host system's memory subsystem.

The transistor density of AMD is 142.6M per mm², reflecting the advanced 4 nm process. No equivalent density figure exists for Intel's 10 nm part.

Both parts are listed as Active production status. AMD's predecessor field is empty, while Intel's predecessor is HD Graphics-M. The Intel part is an integrated GPU (IGP) with a ring bus connection, whereas the AMD part has no slot width or bus interface recorded, and its display output is a single USB Type-C port.