Intel Arc 130T Mobile vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive benchmark victory for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile over the Intel Arc 130T Mobile, though the comparison is limited by the absence of any direct head-to-head test results in the database. The NVIDIA part carries eight recorded benchmark scores, while the Intel Arc 130T Mobile has no recorded benchmarks at all. This absence of data for the Intel part means that all quantitative comparisons must rely on the NVIDIA side alone, and the Intel side can only be assessed through its architectural specifications.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile produces an average benchmark score of 8746 across its eight tests. Its closest rival in the database, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2, scores 8743, a delta of 0%. The Quadro P2200 sits at 8686, which is 0.7% behind the RTX 3050 A Mobile. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X scores 8851, placing it 1.2% ahead, and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 scores 8863, 1.3% ahead. These deltas are all within roughly one percentage point, indicating that the RTX 3050 A Mobile sits in a tightly contested performance band.

Looking at the individual NVIDIA benchmark results, the Passmark G3D test records a score of 11664, which is the strongest single result in its suite. The Geekbench OpenCL test yields 52998, a high raw score that reflects compute-oriented workloads. The Passmark GPU Compute test records 4419. The legacy DirectX tests show lower numbers: DirectX 9 scores 152, DirectX 11 scores 94, DirectX 10 scores 61, and DirectX 12 scores 55. The Passmark G2D test, which measures 2D graphics performance, scores 526.

Because the Intel Arc 130T Mobile has zero recorded benchmarks and zero wins in the head-to-head comparison, the data cannot show any direct performance advantage for the Intel part. The wins column shows 0 for Intel and 0 for NVIDIA, meaning the database has no direct comparison results between these two specific parts. The Intel part's percentile ranking against all GPUs is 50, which places it exactly at the median of the database, while the NVIDIA part sits at the 44th percentile. That percentile gap suggests the Intel part is positioned slightly higher in the overall distribution, but without benchmark scores to verify this, the ranking remains an unverified data point.

The FP32 compute figures offer a partial comparison. The NVIDIA part delivers 4.813 TFLOPS, while the Intel part delivers 3.942 TFLOPS. That is a 0.871 TFLOPS difference in favor of NVIDIA, roughly 22% higher. In FP16, the Intel part reaches 7.885 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, while the NVIDIA part delivers 4.813 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The Intel part's FP16 figure is higher on paper, but this reflects a reduced-precision path rather than a raw throughput advantage.

Pixel and texture rates also favor different sides. The Intel part records a pixel rate of 61.60 GPixel/s, which is 43% higher than the NVIDIA part's 42.98 GPixel/s. The Intel texture rate is 123.2 GTexel/s, which is 64% higher than the NVIDIA part's 75.21 GTexel/s. These fillrate advantages stem from the Intel part's higher boost clock and its specific shader-to-TMU arrangement, but they do not translate into any measured benchmark wins in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers, process nodes, and architectural generations. The Intel Arc 130T Mobile uses the Arrow Lake-H chip with the Xe-LPG+ architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the GA106 chip with the Ampere architecture, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The NVIDIA part is part of the GeForce 30-series mobile lineup, while the Intel part belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) generation.

The NVIDIA chip has 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 43.5M per mm². The Intel chip's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown, so no density comparison is possible. The process node difference, 5 nm versus 8 nm, indicates that Intel's part is manufactured on a more advanced node, but the architectural designs are fundamentally different in their execution resources.

Shader and fixed-function hardware differ significantly. The NVIDIA part has 1792 shading units, 56 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 14 RT cores, and 56 tensor cores. The Intel part has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, 28 ROPs, and 7 RT cores. Intel's tensor core count is not listed. The NVIDIA part has exactly double the shading units and double the RT cores of the Intel part. The TMU count is identical at 56, while the ROP count is 32 versus 28.

Clock speeds show a stark contrast. The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The NVIDIA part has a base clock of 1065 MHz and a boost clock of 1343 MHz. Intel's boost clock is 857 MHz higher, which partially compensates for its lower shader count in certain workloads. The NVIDIA part's memory clock is listed as 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective, while the Intel part uses system shared memory with no dedicated clock.

Memory configurations are entirely different. The NVIDIA part has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part uses system shared memory, with a system-dependent bandwidth figure and no dedicated VRAM. This is a fundamental architectural split: the NVIDIA part has its own memory pool, while the Intel part relies on the host system's memory.

Power consumption also differs. The Intel part has a TDP of 35 W, while the NVIDIA part has a TDP of 45 W. Both are listed as IGP (integrated graphics processor) slot width, meaning neither uses a discrete add-in card form factor. The NVIDIA part has no power connectors, while the Intel part lists no power connector information. The bus interface is IGP for Intel and PCIe 4.0 x8 for NVIDIA, indicating that the NVIDIA part connects through a PCIe link even in a mobile form factor.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile is the only one of the two parts with any recorded benchmark results. Its average score of 8746 places it in a performance band where its nearest rivals are all within 1.3% of its score. The Intel Arc 130T Mobile has no benchmarks, no wins, and no rival comparisons in the database, so its actual performance cannot be verified from recorded measurements.

For users who require verified benchmark data, the NVIDIA part is the only option with evidence. Its 44th percentile ranking across all GPUs, combined with its 1792 shading units, 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory, and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, gives it a concrete performance profile. The Intel part's 50th percentile ranking suggests it may be positioned slightly higher in the database distribution, but with no scores to back that ranking, it remains an unsubstantiated entry.

The Intel part does offer architectural advantages in specific areas. Its 5 nm process node is more advanced than NVIDIA's 8 nm node. Its boost clock of 2200 MHz is substantially higher. Its pixel rate of 61.60 GPixel/s and texture rate of 123.2 GTexel/s both exceed the NVIDIA part's corresponding figures. Its TDP of 35 W is 10 W lower than the NVIDIA part's 45 W. These factors make the Intel part attractive on paper for power-sensitive integrated designs, but the database contains no performance evidence to confirm that these specifications translate into real-world wins.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show the following differences between the two parts:

• Process node: 5 nm (TSMC) for Intel versus 8 nm (Samsung) for NVIDIA
• Transistors: unknown for Intel versus 12,000 million for NVIDIA
• Die size: unknown for Intel versus 276 mm² for NVIDIA
• Base clock: 300 MHz for Intel versus 1065 MHz for NVIDIA
• Boost clock: 2200 MHz for Intel versus 1343 MHz for NVIDIA
• Memory size: System Shared for Intel versus 4 GB for NVIDIA
• Memory type: System Shared for Intel versus GDDR6 for NVIDIA
• Memory bus width: System Shared for Intel versus 128 bit for NVIDIA
• Memory bandwidth: System Dependent for Intel versus 192.0 GB/s for NVIDIA
• Shading units: 896 for Intel versus 1792 for NVIDIA
• ROPs: 28 for Intel versus 32 for NVIDIA
• RT cores: 7 for Intel versus 14 for NVIDIA
• Tensor cores: not listed for Intel versus 56 for NVIDIA
• Pixel rate: 61.60 GPixel/s for Intel versus 42.98 GPixel/s for NVIDIA
• Texture rate: 123.2 GTexel/s for Intel versus 75.21 GTexel/s for NVIDIA
• FP32: 3.942 TFLOPS for Intel versus 4.813 TFLOPS for NVIDIA
• FP16: 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) for Intel versus 4.813 TFLOPS (1:1) for NVIDIA
• TDP: 35 W for Intel versus 45 W for NVIDIA
• Power connectors: not listed for Intel versus None for NVIDIA
• Bus interface: IGP for Intel versus PCIe 4.0 x8 for NVIDIA
• Production status: Active for Intel versus End-of-life for NVIDIA
• Release date: 2025-01-12 for Intel versus 2023-12-31 for NVIDIA

Identical specifications include the TMU count at 56, the DirectX version at 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL at 4.6, Vulkan at 1.4, and both list display outputs as portable device dependent.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1792 shading units, exactly double the 896 shading units of the Intel Arc 130T Mobile.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA part has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Q: How do the clock speeds compare?

A: The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The NVIDIA part has a base clock of 1065 MHz and a boost clock of 1343 MHz.

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA part delivers 4.813 TFLOPS, which is higher than the Intel part's 3.942 TFLOPS.

Q: What are the power consumption levels?

A: The Intel part has a TDP of 35 W, while the NVIDIA part has a TDP of 45 W.

Q: Does the database show any direct benchmark comparison between these two GPUs?

A: No. The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, and the wins count is 0 for both parts. The NVIDIA part has eight individual benchmark scores, while the Intel part has none.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile wins in every category where recorded data exists. It has all eight benchmark scores, an average score of 8746, a 44th percentile ranking, and a nearest-rival set that places it within 1.3% of four comparable GPUs. Its 1792 shading units, 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory, 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 4.813 TFLOPS FP32 throughput give it a measurable compute and memory advantage. Its 45 W TDP is higher, but it carries no power connectors and uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, making it suitable for mobile designs with an available PCIe link.

The Intel Arc 130T Mobile wins in the specification categories that favor its design. Its 5 nm process node is more advanced than NVIDIA's 8 nm node. Its 2200 MHz boost clock is 857 MHz higher than the NVIDIA part's boost clock. Its pixel rate of 61.60 GPixel/s and texture rate of 123.2 GTexel/s exceed the NVIDIA part's 42.98 GPixel/s and 75.21 GTexel/s. Its FP16 throughput of 7.885 TFLOPS is higher than NVIDIA's 4.813 TFLOPS, though at a 2:1 ratio versus NVIDIA's 1:1 ratio. Its 35 W TDP is 10 W lower, and its production status is Active, meaning it remains a current product, while the NVIDIA part is marked End-of-life. For an integrated solution that prioritizes lower power draw, higher fillrates, and a modern process node, the Intel part has the specification-level advantage. For any measured performance, the NVIDIA part is the only one with evidence in the database.