AMD Steam Machine GPU vs Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile Comparison

The Verdict

The comparison between the AMD Steam Machine GPU and Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile is not a contest of equals; it is a study in extreme performance stratification. The data shows the AMD part, built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with a Navi 33 chip, delivers 17.56 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, whereas the Intel integrated solution, based on Generation 12.2 with a Raptor Lake chip, manages 307.2 GFLOPS. That represents a 57.1x gap in raw floating-point throughput, which translates into fundamentally different use cases. The AMD Steam Machine GPU is a discrete-class console component with 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory and a 128-bit bus delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile is an integrated graphics processor sharing system memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent. For any user seeking playable frame rates in modern titles, the AMD part is the only rational choice. For basic desktop composition, video decode, and lightweight productivity, the Intel part suffices. The benchmark database places both at the 50th percentile against all GPUs, but that equal percentile reflects the wide distribution of integrated and entry-level parts; the actual measured compute and memory capabilities are orders of magnitude apart.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Steam Machine GPU is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, packing 13,300 million transistors into a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2 million per square millimeter. The chip is codenamed Hotpink Bonefish and belongs to the Console GPU (Valve) generation. It uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture, which supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GPU includes 28 ray tracing cores, a capability entirely absent from the Intel part.

The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel, with the chip labeled Raptor Lake and architecture Generation 12.2. It belongs to the HD Graphics-M (Raptor Lake) generation. No transistor count, die size, or density figures are recorded for this part. It supports DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Notably, the Intel part has no ray tracing cores, which limits its feature set in newer titles that employ hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

The clock behavior also differs substantially. The AMD GPU has a base clock of 1720 MHz, a boost clock of 2450 MHz, and a game clock of 2250 MHz, with memory clocked at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The Intel part runs at a base of 300 MHz and boosts to 1200 MHz, with memory speed described as system shared. The AMD part uses dedicated GDDR6 memory, while the Intel part relies on system shared memory, meaning the memory type, bus width, and bandwidth are all system dependent.

Power consumption is another stark divider. The AMD Steam Machine GPU has a TDP of 110 W and requires no external power connectors, while the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile has a TDP of 15 W and operates as an IGP with a Ring Bus interface. The AMD part measures 156 mm in length, 152 mm in height, and 162 mm in width, whereas the Intel part has no recorded dimensions, consistent with its integrated nature.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Steam Machine GPU wins in every category that matters for gaming and graphics-intensive workloads. Its FP32 compute of 17.56 TFLOPS dwarfs the Intel part's 307.2 GFLOPS. The pixel rate of 156.8 GPixel/s versus 4.800 GPixel/s means the AMD part can fill the screen with far more detailed scenes per second. The texture rate of 274.4 GTexel/s versus 9.600 GTexel/s allows for richer surface detail. The AMD part has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units, compared to 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs on the Intel part. The AMD GPU also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, delivering 17.56 TFLOPS in half precision, while the Intel part offers 614.4 GFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio.

The Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile wins only in power efficiency and simplicity. At 15 W TDP, it consumes a fraction of the AMD part's 110 W. It requires no additional cooling beyond what a laptop chassis provides, and its system shared memory model eliminates the need for dedicated VRAM allocation. For tasks like office productivity, web browsing, and video playback, the Intel part is sufficient, though the database provides no benchmark scores to quantify that sufficiency. The AMD part's display outputs include 1x HDMI 2.1a and 1x DisplayPort 2.1, whereas the Intel part's display outputs are described as portable device dependent, meaning they vary by laptop implementation.

The release dates also differ: the AMD Steam Machine GPU launched on 2026-06-28, while the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile launched on 2023-01-03. The Intel part has a recorded successor, Arc Graphics-M, while the AMD part has neither predecessor nor successor listed.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Steam Machine GPU delivers 17.56 TFLOPS FP32, which is 57.1x higher than the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile's 307.2 GFLOPS FP32.

Q: Does the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile support ray tracing?

A: No, it has no ray tracing cores. The AMD Steam Machine GPU includes 28 ray tracing cores.

Q: What memory configuration does each use?

A: The AMD part uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: How do the pixel rates compare?

A: The AMD GPU achieves 156.8 GPixel/s, while the Intel part achieves 4.800 GPixel/s. The AMD part is 32.7x faster in pixel fill rate.

Q: Which GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Only the AMD Steam Machine GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The AMD Steam Machine GPU has a TDP of 110 W, while the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile has a TDP of 15 W. The Intel part consumes 7.3x less power.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark results for these two parts, and neither has an average benchmark score. However, the specification data provides the basis for calculating performance differentials across multiple metrics.

In FP32 compute, the AMD Steam Machine GPU produces 17.56 TFLOPS versus 307.2 GFLOPS for the Intel part. Dividing 17.56 TFLOPS by 307.2 GFLOPS yields a 57.1x advantage. This is the largest recorded gap between the two. The FP16 comparison shows the AMD part at 17.56 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio) versus 614.4 GFLOPS (2:1 ratio) for Intel, a 28.6x difference.

Pixel fill rate favors the AMD GPU at 156.8 GPixel/s versus 4.800 GPixel/s, representing a 32.7x advantage. Texture fill rate shows 274.4 GTexel/s versus 9.600 GTexel/s, a 28.6x gap. These rates directly influence rendering resolution and texture detail in games.

Memory bandwidth is another decisive factor. The AMD part provides 288.0 GB/s from dedicated GDDR6, while the Intel part's bandwidth is system dependent, meaning it varies with the host system's memory configuration. In typical laptop implementations, shared memory bandwidth is far lower than dedicated GDDR6, though the database does not specify a fixed figure for Intel.

Clock speeds matter for sustained performance. The AMD GPU boosts to 2450 MHz, while the Intel part boosts to 1200 MHz. That is a 2.04x difference in boost clock, but the architectural efficiency of RDNA 3.0 amplifies the gap far beyond clock frequency alone. The AMD part's base clock of 1720 MHz is higher than the Intel part's boost clock of 1200 MHz, meaning even at idle baseline, the AMD GPU operates at 1.43x the Intel part's maximum clock.

Shader resources show a 14x difference in shading units (1792 versus 128), a 14x difference in TMUs (112 versus 8), and a 16x difference in ROPs (64 versus 4). These resource differences combine with the clock and memory advantages to produce the massive compute gap.

The transistor count also tells a story. The AMD part contains 13,300 million transistors, while the Intel part's transistor count is not recorded. The AMD die measures 204 mm², which, combined with the 6 nm process, yields a density of 65.2 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel part's die size is not recorded, but its 10 nm process and integrated nature suggest a much smaller, less complex design.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two parts:

• Manufacturer: AMD versus Intel
• Chip: Navi 33 versus Raptor Lake
• Architecture: RDNA 3.0 versus Generation 12.2
• Codename: Hotpink Bonefish versus not recorded
• Generation: Console GPU (Valve) versus HD Graphics-M (Raptor Lake)
• Process Node: 6 nm versus 10 nm
• Foundry: TSMC versus Intel
• Transistors: 13,300 million versus not recorded
• Die Size: 204 mm² versus not recorded
• Transistor Density: 65.2M / mm² versus not recorded
• Base Clock: 1720 MHz versus 300 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2450 MHz versus 1200 MHz
• Game Clock: 2250 MHz versus not recorded
• Memory Clock: 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective versus System Shared
• Memory Size: 8 GB versus System Shared
• Memory Type: GDDR6 versus System Shared
• Memory Bus Width: 128 bit versus System Shared
• Memory Bandwidth: 288.0 GB/s versus System Dependent
• Shading Units: 1792 versus 128
• TMUs: 112 versus 8
• ROPs: 64 versus 4
• RT Cores: 28 versus not recorded
• Pixel Rate: 156.8 GPixel/s versus 4.800 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 274.4 GTexel/s versus 9.600 GTexel/s
• FP32: 17.56 TFLOPS versus 307.2 GFLOPS
• FP16: 17.56 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 614.4 GFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 110 W versus 15 W
• Slot Width: not recorded versus IGP
• Power Connectors: None versus not recorded
• Bus Interface: not recorded versus Ring Bus
• Display Outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1a, 1x DisplayPort 2.1 versus Portable Device Dependent
• DirectX Support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1)
• Dimensions: 156 mm x 152 mm x 162 mm versus not recorded
• Release Date: 2026-06-28 versus 2023-01-03
• Successor: not recorded versus Arc Graphics-M

The data confirms the AMD Steam Machine GPU is a purpose-built console component with discrete-level performance, while the Intel UHD Graphics 710 Mobile is a minimal integrated solution for basic display output. No benchmark scores exist for either part in the database, so the specification comparison stands as the sole quantitative basis for evaluation. The 57.1x FP32 gap, 32.7x pixel rate gap, and 28.6x texture rate gap leave no ambiguity about which part is designed for demanding workloads.