Intel Arc 130V Mobile vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc 130V Mobile and the NVIDIA N1 20SM. Both entries show an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile ranking of 50 against all GPUs. This means there are no direct performance comparisons available to quantify the gap between these two integrated graphics processors.

Without measured benchmark data, the analysis must rely entirely on the architectural and specification differences documented in the database. The NVIDIA N1 20SM delivers a raw compute advantage on paper: its FP32 throughput is 12.01 TFLOPS versus 3.315 TFLOPS for the Intel part, a difference of roughly 3.6 times. The texture rate tells a similar story, with the NVIDIA chip producing 375.4 GTexel/s compared to 103.6 GTexel/s for the Intel GPU. These are theoretical peak rates, not measured application performance, but they indicate the NVIDIA part has a substantially larger execution resource pool.

The pixel rate is closer. NVIDIA reaches 56.30 GPixel/s while Intel manages 51.80 GPixel/s, a modest 8.7% advantage. This narrow gap suggests that rasterization throughput, particularly at lower resolutions where pixel output limits frame rates, may not be as lopsided as the compute figures imply. However, the Intel part has 28 ROPs against 24 ROPs for NVIDIA, which partially explains why its pixel rate stays competitive despite far fewer shaders.

The FP16 comparison reveals a significant architectural divergence. Intel lists 6.630 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, meaning it halves its FP32 rate. NVIDIA lists 12.01 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not sacrifice FP32 throughput for half-precision work. For workloads that leverage FP16, such as certain machine learning inference paths, the NVIDIA GPU maintains its full compute output while Intel drops to roughly 55% of its FP32 rate.

Where Each One Wins

For raw compute throughput, the NVIDIA N1 20SM holds a decisive theoretical advantage. Its shading unit count of 2560 versus 896 for Intel represents a 2.86 times difference. The texture mapping unit count of 160 versus 56 is a 2.86 times difference as well. These resource ratios align with the FP32 and texture rate gaps, suggesting that shader-heavy workloads, such as complex 3D rendering or compute shaders, will favor the NVIDIA part substantially.

For pixel fill and display output, the Intel Arc 130V Mobile has a smaller deficit. The pixel rate gap is only 8.7%, and Intel actually has more ROPs (28 versus 24). In scenarios where pixel throughput binds, such as lower-resolution gaming with simple shading, the Intel GPU should remain closer to parity. The Intel part also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. This means the Intel GPU is the only one of the two with documented API support for standard graphics frameworks, making it the practical choice for conventional game and application compatibility.

The NVIDIA part counters with dedicated tensor cores, 80 of them, while Intel lists no tensor core count. This gives NVIDIA a documented path for AI-accelerated workloads. The NVIDIA memory subsystem also stands apart: 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, whereas Intel uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." For memory-bound tasks, the NVIDIA GPU offers a fixed, high-bandwidth pool, while Intel depends entirely on the host system's memory configuration.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the NVIDIA N1 20SM is the stronger compute performer on paper. Its FP32 throughput is 3.6 times higher, its texture rate is 3.6 times higher, and it carries 80 tensor cores where Intel has none. It also provides 128 GB of dedicated LPDDR5X memory with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, removing any dependency on system RAM performance. For users prioritizing peak compute, AI acceleration, or memory bandwidth, the NVIDIA part is the clear choice based on specifications alone.

The Intel Arc 130V Mobile wins on software compatibility and API support. It is the only one of the two with DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. Its pixel rate is within 8.7% of NVIDIA's, and it has 4 additional ROPs. For conventional graphics workloads that rely on standard APIs, the Intel GPU offers a functional path that the NVIDIA part currently lacks in the database record. The Intel GPU also has a lower base clock (300 MHz versus 741 MHz) but a higher memory flexibility through system shared memory, which can be advantageous if the host system has fast RAM.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM uses a 5 nm process node from TSMC, while Intel uses a 3 nm node from the same foundry. The smaller process node for Intel indicates a manufacturing density advantage, but the NVIDIA die is larger at 382 mm² versus 172 mm², meaning NVIDIA devotes more silicon area to execution resources. The Intel GPU has a TDP of 37 W, while the NVIDIA TDP is unknown, so no power efficiency comparison can be made from the recorded data.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM has 12.01 TFLOPS FP32, which is 3.6 times higher than the Intel Arc 130V Mobile's 3.315 TFLOPS.

Q: Does either GPU support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Only the Intel Arc 130V Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The NVIDIA N1 20SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Q: How much memory does the NVIDIA N1 20SM have?

A: It has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc 130V Mobile uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM has 20 RT cores, while the Intel Arc 130V Mobile has 7 RT cores.

Q: What are the process nodes for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc 130V Mobile uses a 3 nm TSMC process, and the NVIDIA N1 20SM uses a 5 nm TSMC process.

Q: What is the pixel rate difference?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM has a pixel rate of 56.30 GPixel/s, which is 8.7% higher than the Intel Arc 130V Mobile's 51.80 GPixel/s.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc 130V Mobile is built on the Xe2-LPG architecture using the Lunar Lake chip, part of the Arc Graphics-M (Lunar Lake) generation. It has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, 28 ROPs, and 7 RT cores. Its FP16 throughput is 6.630 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The GPU operates on a 3 nm TSMC process with a die size of 172 mm². Its predecessor is listed as HD Graphics-M.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture on the GB20B chip, part of the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. It has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 24 ROPs, 20 RT cores, and 80 tensor cores. Its FP16 throughput matches its FP32 rate at 12.01 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The GPU uses a 5 nm TSMC process with a die size of 382 mm². The NVIDIA part has no predecessor listed.

The API support differs completely. Intel exposes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. NVIDIA reports N/A for all three APIs. The NVIDIA part uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while Intel uses an IGP bus interface. NVIDIA displays through 1x HDMI, while Intel's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent."

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in clock speeds, memory configuration, compute resources, and process technology.

Base clock: Intel runs at 300 MHz, NVIDIA at 741 MHz. Boost clock: Intel reaches 1850 MHz, NVIDIA reaches 2346 MHz.

Memory: Intel uses system shared memory with no dedicated size, type, bus width, or fixed bandwidth. NVIDIA uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA's memory clock is listed as 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective.

Shading units: Intel has 896, NVIDIA has 2560. TMUs: Intel has 56, NVIDIA has 160. ROPs: Intel has 28, NVIDIA has 24. RT cores: Intel has 7, NVIDIA has 20. Tensor cores: Intel has none listed, NVIDIA has 80.

FP32 throughput: Intel delivers 3.315 TFLOPS, NVIDIA delivers 12.01 TFLOPS. FP16 throughput: Intel delivers 6.630 TFLOPS (2:1), NVIDIA delivers 12.01 TFLOPS (1:1). Pixel rate: Intel delivers 51.80 GPixel/s, NVIDIA delivers 56.30 GPixel/s. Texture rate: Intel delivers 103.6 GTexel/s, NVIDIA delivers 375.4 GTexel/s.

Process node: Intel uses 3 nm, NVIDIA uses 5 nm, both from TSMC. Die size: Intel is 172 mm², NVIDIA is 382 mm². TDP: Intel is 37 W, NVIDIA is unknown. Power connectors: Intel has none listed, NVIDIA has "None."

Release date: Intel launched on 2024-09-23, NVIDIA launches on 2026-05-31. Both are listed as Active in production status. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded.