Intel Arc 130T Mobile vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no head-to-head benchmark results for the Intel Arc 130T Mobile and the NVIDIA N1X 40SM. Their average benchmark scores are both recorded as zero, and neither GPU holds a win in any direct comparison. The absence of measured performance data means the two products cannot be ranked against each other through synthetic or real-world testing in the current records. What is clear from the available specifications is that the two IGPs occupy different performance tiers, with the NVIDIA part showing substantially higher theoretical throughput across every major compute metric.

The Intel Arc 130T Mobile delivers 3.942 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS in the same precision. That places the NVIDIA part roughly six times higher in raw single-precision throughput. In FP16 operations, the Intel GPU reaches 7.885 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, while the NVIDIA GPU reaches 24.02 TFLOPS in a 1:1 ratio. The texture rate shows a similar gap: 123.2 GTexel/s for Intel versus 750.7 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. Pixel throughput also favors NVIDIA, at 93.84 GPixel/s compared to 61.60 GPixel/s for Intel. These figures indicate the NVIDIA N1X 40SM is designed for a much heavier compute load, though no direct benchmark confirms how either GPU behaves under actual software.

The clock speeds reveal part of the story. The Intel GPU has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The NVIDIA GPU has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. The higher base clock on the NVIDIA part suggests it maintains a more consistent level of performance at idle or light load, while the boost clocks are relatively close. The NVIDIA GPU also has access to dedicated memory running at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective speed, whereas the Intel GPU uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. That memory arrangement gives the NVIDIA part a fixed 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a major advantage for bandwidth-sensitive workloads.

Both GPUs are recorded with a 5 nm process node from TSMC. The NVIDIA part has a recorded die size of 382 mm², while the Intel die size is listed as unknown. Transistor counts are unknown for both. The NVIDIA GPU carries 5120 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, 40 render output units, 40 ray tracing cores, and 160 tensor cores. The Intel GPU has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, 28 render output units, and 7 ray tracing cores. Tensor cores are not listed for the Intel part. These architectural counts explain the large gap in theoretical throughput and indicate that the NVIDIA GPU is built for significantly more parallel work.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc 130T Mobile is built on the Xe-LPG+ architecture, part of the Arc Graphics-M generation tied to Arrow Lake-H chips. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, part of the Blackwell IGP generation on the GB20B chip. Both are manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC, but the underlying designs diverge sharply. Intel has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, 28 ROPs, and 7 ray tracing cores. NVIDIA has 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 40 ROPs, 40 ray tracing cores, and 160 tensor cores. The presence of 160 tensor cores on the NVIDIA GPU indicates built-in acceleration for tensor operations, which the Intel part lacks entirely in the recorded data.

Memory architecture differs completely. The Intel GPU relies on system shared memory, so its bus width, memory type, and memory size are all listed as system shared, with bandwidth marked as system dependent. The NVIDIA GPU has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. That is a fixed, substantial memory pool, while the Intel GPU's performance depends on the host system's memory configuration.

API support also separates the two. The Intel GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA GPU lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A in the database. That means the NVIDIA part has no recorded API compatibility, while the Intel part is fully documented for modern graphics APIs. The NVIDIA GPU uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the Intel GPU is listed simply as IGP. The NVIDIA part has one HDMI display output, while the Intel part's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent. Both are categorized as IGP slot width, meaning neither is a discrete add-in card. The NVIDIA GPU has no power connectors, while the Intel GPU also has no power connector listing. The NVIDIA TDP is unknown, while the Intel TDP is 35 W.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc 130T Mobile wins in compatibility and API support. It records DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which makes it suitable for modern gaming and general graphics workloads that rely on these standard interfaces. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM records no API support in the database, which makes its software ecosystem unclear. The Intel GPU also has a lower TDP at 35 W, which suggests it can fit into power-constrained designs, though the database does not record a TDP for the NVIDIA part to make a direct comparison. The Intel GPU's system shared memory approach means it can flexibly use whatever memory the host provides, though the bandwidth is system dependent.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM wins in raw compute capacity. Its FP32 throughput of 24.02 TFLOPS is more than six times the Intel GPU's 3.942 TFLOPS. FP16 performance is also dramatically higher: 24.02 TFLOPS versus 7.885 TFLOPS. Texture rate is 750.7 GTexel/s versus 123.2 GTexel/s, and pixel rate is 93.84 GPixel/s versus 61.60 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA GPU has 40 ray tracing cores and 160 tensor cores, pointing to stronger ray tracing and tensor processing capabilities, while the Intel GPU has 7 ray tracing cores and no tensor core listing. The fixed 273.2 GB/s memory bandwidth on the NVIDIA part is another clear advantage, as is the 128 GB memory capacity, which dwarfs the Intel GPU's system shared pool. The NVIDIA GPU also has a higher boost clock at 2346 MHz versus 2200 MHz, and a higher base clock at 741 MHz versus 300 MHz.

For use cases, the Intel part appears better suited to lightweight, power-conscious systems where standard API support matters. The NVIDIA part appears oriented toward high-throughput compute, such as machine learning inference, rendering, or other parallel workloads, given its tensor cores and massive shading unit count. The database does not include benchmark scores, so these conclusions rest on the recorded specifications.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every recorded specification except the process node, foundry, slot width, and production status. Both use a 5 nm TSMC process and are listed as IGP in slot width, and both are active in production. The NVIDIA part has a die size of 382 mm², while the Intel die size is unknown. The Intel GPU has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz; the NVIDIA GPU has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz.

Memory differs completely. The Intel GPU uses system shared memory in all respects, while the NVIDIA GPU has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 1067 MHz at 8.5 Gbps effective. The Intel GPU's memory bandwidth is system dependent.

Compute resources differ by a wide margin. The Intel GPU has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, 28 ROPs, and 7 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA GPU has 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 40 ROPs, 40 ray tracing cores, and 160 tensor cores. Tensor cores are not listed for the Intel part. Pixel rate is 61.60 GPixel/s for Intel and 93.84 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate is 123.2 GTexel/s for Intel and 750.7 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. FP32 throughput is 3.942 TFLOPS for Intel and 24.02 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16 throughput is 7.885 TFLOPS for Intel and 24.02 TFLOPS for NVIDIA.

TDP is recorded as 35 W for Intel and unknown for NVIDIA. The bus interface is IGP for Intel and PCIe 5.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are portable device dependent for Intel and 1x HDMI for NVIDIA. API support is recorded for Intel (DirectX 12 Ultimate 12_2, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4) and marked N/A for NVIDIA. The release dates differ: Intel is dated 2025-01-12, while NVIDIA is dated 2026-05-31. The Intel GPU lists its predecessor as HD Graphics-M; the NVIDIA GPU has no predecessor recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Arc 130T Mobile delivers 3.942 TFLOPS.

Q: What memory configurations do the two GPUs use?

A: The Intel Arc 130T Mobile uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: No. The Intel Arc 130T Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A in the database.

Q: How many ray tracing cores does each GPU have?

A: The Intel Arc 130T Mobile has 7 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 40 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the process node for both GPUs?

A: Both the Intel Arc 130T Mobile and the NVIDIA N1X 40SM are manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC.

Q: What are the boost clocks of the two GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc 130T Mobile has a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has a boost clock of 2346 MHz.