AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU vs Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has no individual benchmark entries in the database, while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has a single recorded score. This limitation means the head-to-head comparison relies on the few measurable points available, primarily the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test and the raw specification-derived performance indicators.

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU scores 733 points in the 3dmark_3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12 test. This places it in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and Intel Arc Graphics 24EU, both with identical average scores of 733 points, showing a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon HD 6470M trails by 1.4% with a score of 723, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M sits 2.4% ahead at 751 points. These are all extremely low-end results, confirming the integrated graphics class of this part.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, making a direct score-to-score comparison impossible. The specification data, however, provides a clear picture of theoretical performance differences. The AMD part delivers 8.294 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel part delivers 1.946 TFLOPS. That is a 4.26x difference in raw shader throughput. The pixel rate for the AMD GPU is 86.40 GPixel/s versus 30.40 GPixel/s for the Intel GPU, a 2.84x advantage. Texture rate shows 129.6 GTexel/s for AMD versus 60.80 GTexel/s for Intel, a 2.13x difference.

Memory bandwidth further separates the two. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5X across a 128-bit bus, delivering 119.9 GB/s. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU uses system shared memory with bandwidth listed as system dependent. The dedicated memory configuration of the AMD part provides a fixed, guaranteed bandwidth figure, whereas the Intel solution depends entirely on the host system's memory setup.

The Verdict

The data indicates the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU is the substantially stronger graphics processor. The FP32 output of 8.294 TFLOPS versus 1.946 TFLOPS shows a massive compute advantage. The AMD part also carries 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, compared to 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs on the Intel part. Every measured throughput metric favors AMD by at least a factor of two.

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU's single benchmark score of 733 places it in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs, with nearest rivals being other low-end integrated graphics parts. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU sits in the 50th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Even without a direct benchmark score for the AMD part, the percentile ranking and the specification sheet suggest it belongs in a different performance class entirely.

The Intel part also draws more power. Its TDP is 65 W, while the AMD GPU operates at 28 W. The AMD part achieves higher theoretical performance while consuming less than half the power budget. This efficiency gap is notable. The AMD part is a console-class GPU on a 4 nm TSMC node with 25,390 million transistors, whereas the Intel part is an integrated graphics solution on a 3 nm TSMC node with 17,800 million transistors.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU wins in every category where data exists. Compute performance, pixel throughput, texture throughput, memory bandwidth, and shading unit count all favor AMD. The ray tracing capability is present on the AMD part with 12 dedicated RT cores, while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU lists no RT cores. The AMD part also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 8.294 TFLOPS, whereas the Intel part achieves 3.891 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio.

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU does have one advantage: it is an integrated graphics processor with a Ring Bus interface, meaning no separate video memory purchase is required. The memory is system shared, which can be simpler in a system build. It also uses a smaller die at 243 mm² compared to 178 mm² for the AMD part, though the AMD die packs far more transistors at a higher density of 142.6M per mm² versus 73.3M per mm² for Intel.

The performance context matters. The Intel part's 733 benchmark score and 3rd percentile ranking indicate it is positioned at the very bottom of the GPU performance spectrum. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and 24EU, both scoring identically. The AMD part's 50th percentile ranking places it in the middle of the database's GPU population, a dramatically different performance tier.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS, which is 4.26 times the 1.946 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU have dedicated ray tracing hardware?

A: No. The database lists no RT cores for the Intel part, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU includes 12 RT cores.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

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 64EU uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has a TDP of 28 W, while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has a TDP of 65 W.

Q: Where does the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU rank among all GPUs?

A: It sits in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, with a benchmark score of 733. Its nearest rivals are other low-end integrated graphics parts.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has 768 shading units, while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has 512.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural families. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU uses RDNA 3.0 architecture on a chip codenamed Hawk Point. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU uses Xe-LPG architecture on an Arrow Lake-S chip. Both are manufactured by TSMC, but on different process nodes: AMD uses 4 nm, Intel uses 3 nm.

Transistor counts differ significantly. The AMD chip packs 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, achieving a density of 142.6M per mm². The Intel chip contains 17,800 million transistors on a larger 243 mm² die, with a lower density of 73.3M per mm². The AMD design is notably denser despite using a slightly larger process node.

The AMD GPU includes 12 RT cores, a feature entirely absent from the Intel part's specification list. The AMD part also uses dedicated LPDDR5X memory, while the Intel part relies on system shared memory. The AMD part is listed as a console GPU generation, while the Intel part belongs to the Arc Graphics generation for Arrow Lake.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part outputs through a single USB Type-C connector, while the Intel part's display outputs are motherboard dependent. The AMD part lists no power connectors and draws 28 W, while the Intel part is an IGP with a 65 W TDP and a Ring Bus interface.

The Intel part has a predecessor listed as HD Graphics, indicating a long product lineage. The AMD part has no predecessor or successor listed. Both are currently in active production status.

Specification Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU operates at an 800 MHz base clock with a 2700 MHz boost clock, while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU runs at 300 MHz base and 1900 MHz boost. The AMD memory clock is 937 MHz with 7.5 Gbps effective speed. The Intel memory clock is listed as system shared.

Shading units: 768 on AMD versus 512 on Intel. Texture mapping units: 48 versus 32. Raster operation units: 32 versus 16. The AMD part has 12 RT cores; the Intel part has none listed.

Pixel rate: 86.40 GPixel/s for AMD versus 30.40 GPixel/s for Intel. Texture rate: 129.6 GTexel/s versus 60.80 GTexel/s. FP32 performance: 8.294 TFLOPS versus 1.946 TFLOPS. FP16 performance: 8.294 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio for AMD, 3.891 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio for Intel.

Memory: 16 GB LPDDR5X on a 128-bit bus with 119.9 GB/s bandwidth for AMD. Intel uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The AMD TDP is 28 W, the Intel TDP is 65 W. The AMD part has no power connectors; the Intel part lists none as well. The AMD bus interface is not listed, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus. Display outputs: single USB Type-C for AMD, motherboard dependent for Intel.

The AMD part was released on 2024-12-31, and the Intel part on 2024-10-23. The AMD die is 178 mm² versus 243 mm² for Intel, with transistor densities of 142.6M per mm² and 73.3M per mm² respectively. Neither part has a launch MSRP listed in the database.