Intel Arc 130T Mobile vs Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the Intel Arc 130T Mobile or the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero, and the head-to-head benchmark table is empty. This means there are no direct performance comparisons with exact numbers to walk through, as neither GPU has accumulated measurable results in the database.

What the recorded data does show is a clear theoretical performance gap based on the specification fields. The Arc 130T Mobile delivers 3.942 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Graphics 24EU Mobile delivers 384.0 GFLOPS. That is a difference of 3.558 TFLOPS, making the Arc 130T Mobile roughly ten times higher in raw floating-point throughput. In pixel rate, the Arc 130T Mobile records 61.60 GPixel/s against 4.000 GPixel/s for the Graphics 24EU Mobile. Texture rate follows the same pattern: 123.2 GTexel/s versus 12.00 GTexel/s. These are the only numeric comparisons available in the database, and they consistently favor the Arc 130T Mobile by a wide margin.

The lack of benchmark entries means percentile rankings are identical at 50 for both parts, offering no separation in real-world workload performance. Without measured scores, the database cannot confirm how these theoretical figures translate into frame rates, rendering times, or compute tasks. The data indicates that the Arc 130T Mobile should dominate in any workload that scales with shading units, texture units, or raster operations, but the absence of recorded benchmarks prevents a definitive performance statement.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the specification data, the Arc 130T Mobile wins in every measurable compute and graphics category. Its shading unit count of 896 dwarfs the 192 shading units on the Graphics 24EU Mobile. Texture mapping units number 56 versus 12, and raster operations units number 28 versus 4. The Arc 130T Mobile also includes 7 ray tracing cores, while the Graphics 24EU Mobile has none. Any workload that uses shaders, textures, pixel fill, or ray tracing will favor the Arc 130T Mobile according to the recorded specifications.

The Graphics 24EU Mobile does hold advantages in power consumption and integration. Its thermal design power is 6 W, compared to 35 W for the Arc 130T Mobile. It also uses a Ring Bus interface, while the Arc 130T Mobile uses an IGP bus interface. For systems where power draw is the primary constraint, the Graphics 24EU Mobile is the more efficient option on paper. The data shows a 29 W difference in TDP, which could matter in fanless designs or very small portable devices.

Clock behavior also differs. The Arc 130T Mobile boosts to 2200 MHz, more than double the 1000 MHz boost clock of the Graphics 24EU Mobile. Both parts share a 300 MHz base clock. The higher boost clock contributes to the Arc 130T Mobile's compute advantages, but it also explains the higher power draw. The Graphics 24EU Mobile cannot match the Arc 130T Mobile in any performance metric listed in the database, so its win condition is strictly power efficiency and system integration simplicity.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different Intel architectures and manufacturing processes. The Arc 130T Mobile uses the Xe-LPG+ architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Graphics 24EU Mobile uses the Xe-LP architecture, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. This represents a two-generation process gap, with the Arc 130T Mobile using a denser, more advanced node.

The chip-level differences are substantial. The Arc 130T Mobile is based on Arrow Lake-H, while the Graphics 24EU Mobile is based on Twin Lake. The Arc 130T Mobile belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) generation, and the Graphics 24EU Mobile belongs to the HD Graphics-T (Twin Lake) generation. The Arc 130T Mobile's predecessor is listed as HD Graphics-M, while the Graphics 24EU Mobile has no recorded predecessor.

API support differs as well. The Arc 130T Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Graphics 24EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX 12 Ultimate designation indicates support for features like ray tracing and mesh shaders, which aligns with the Arc 130T Mobile's dedicated ray tracing cores. The Graphics 24EU Mobile lacks those hardware features and the corresponding API level.

Memory architecture is identical in description: both use System Shared memory with System Shared type and bus width. Memory bandwidth is System Dependent for both. The Arc 130T Mobile's memory clock is listed as System Shared, and the Graphics 24EU Mobile shows the same. Neither part has dedicated VRAM, so memory performance depends entirely on the host system's RAM configuration.

The production status for both is Active. Release dates are close: the Graphics 24EU Mobile released on 2024-12-31, and the Arc 130T Mobile released on 2025-01-12. Neither has a successor listed, and both have no launch MSRP recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Arc 130T Mobile has 896 shading units, while the Graphics 24EU Mobile has 192 shading units.

Q: Does the Graphics 24EU Mobile support ray tracing?

A: No, the Graphics 24EU Mobile has no ray tracing cores. The Arc 130T Mobile has 7 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock speeds?

A: The Arc 130T Mobile boosts to 2200 MHz, while the Graphics 24EU Mobile boosts to 1000 MHz. Both have a 300 MHz base clock.

Q: Which GPU uses a more advanced manufacturing process?

A: The Arc 130T Mobile uses a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the Graphics 24EU Mobile uses a 10 nm process at Intel.

Q: What DirectX versions do these GPUs support?

A: The Arc 130T Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), and the Graphics 24EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: How much power does each GPU consume?

A: The Arc 130T Mobile has a TDP of 35 W, and the Graphics 24EU Mobile has a TDP of 6 W.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field recorded in the database. The Arc 130T Mobile uses the Arrow Lake-H chip with Xe-LPG+ architecture, while the Graphics 24EU Mobile uses the Twin Lake chip with Xe-LP architecture. The process node is 5 nm at TSMC for the Arc 130T Mobile, versus 10 nm at Intel for the Graphics 24EU Mobile.

Compute resources differ as follows: shading units are 896 versus 192, texture mapping units are 56 versus 12, and raster operations units are 28 versus 4. The Arc 130T Mobile has 7 ray tracing cores, and the Graphics 24EU Mobile has none. Pixel rate is 61.60 GPixel/s versus 4.000 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 123.2 GTexel/s versus 12.00 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 3.942 TFLOPS versus 384.0 GFLOPS. FP16 performance is 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1).

Clock speeds show a 300 MHz base for both, but the boost clock is 2200 MHz for the Arc 130T Mobile and 1000 MHz for the Graphics 24EU Mobile. TDP is 35 W versus 6 W. The bus interface is IGP for the Arc 130T Mobile and Ring Bus for the Graphics 24EU Mobile. DirectX support is 12 Ultimate (12_2) for the Arc 130T Mobile and 12 (12_1) for the Graphics 24EU Mobile. Release dates are 2025-01-12 for the Arc 130T Mobile and 2024-12-31 for the Graphics 24EU Mobile.

Fields that are identical include memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth (all System Shared or System Dependent), display outputs (Portable Device Dependent), OpenGL and Vulkan versions, slot width (IGP), and the absence of a launch MSRP. Both have unknown transistor counts and die sizes.

The Verdict

The recorded data makes the choice straightforward for most use cases. The Arc 130T Mobile is the superior GPU in every compute and graphics specification listed, with roughly ten times the FP32 throughput, over fifteen times the pixel rate, and more than ten times the texture rate compared to the Graphics 24EU Mobile. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and includes ray tracing hardware, making it the only option of the two for modern rendering features.

The Graphics 24EU Mobile is the appropriate pick only when power consumption is the dominant constraint. Its 6 W TDP is far lower than the 35 W TDP of the Arc 130T Mobile, and its Ring Bus interface may simplify integration in certain systems. For basic display output, light 2D workloads, or devices where battery life and heat are critical, the Graphics 24EU Mobile offers a functional but minimal solution.

The database shows no benchmark results for either part, so the verdict relies entirely on specification comparisons. Based on those specifications, the Arc 130T Mobile is the clear choice for any workload involving 3D graphics, compute tasks, or ray tracing. The Graphics 24EU Mobile should be reserved for ultra-low-power designs where the Arc 130T Mobile's 35 W draw is unacceptable. There is no scenario in the recorded data where the Graphics 24EU Mobile outperforms the Arc 130T Mobile in raw performance.