Intel Arc 140T Mobile vs Intel Arc G3 Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded database positions both the Intel Arc 140T Mobile and the Intel Arc G3 as integrated graphics parts with identical overall percentile rankings (50th percentile among all GPUs) and no direct benchmark scores in the head-to-head comparison. However, the architectural and specification data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The Arc G3, built on Intel’s 3 nm Xe3-LPG architecture, delivers a higher peak FP32 throughput, more shading units, and a faster boost clock, while operating at a lower thermal design power. The Arc 140T Mobile, using TSMC’s 5 nm process and the older Xe-LPG+ architecture, counters with a significantly higher pixel fill rate and texture rate due to its larger rasterization pipeline.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in modern API workloads, the Arc G3 is the stronger choice from the data, as its 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 1280 shading units exceed the 4.813 TFLOPS and 1024 shading units of the Arc 140T Mobile. For applications sensitive to fill-rate-bound operations, such as traditional rasterization at high resolutions, the Arc 140T Mobile holds the advantage with 75.20 GPixel/s and 150.4 GTexel/s, compared to 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s for the Arc G3. The choice depends on whether the workload leans toward general compute or legacy rasterization.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs belong to different architectural generations despite sharing the Arc Graphics-M product family. The Intel Arc 140T Mobile is based on the Arrow Lake-H chip and uses the Xe-LPG+ architecture, manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC. The Intel Arc G3 is based on the Panther Lake chip and uses the more recent Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on Intel’s 3 nm process node. This generational shift is reflected in the core configuration: the Arc G3 scales up to 1280 shading units and 10 ray tracing cores, while the Arc 140T Mobile provides 1024 shading units and 8 ray tracing cores.

The texture mapping unit (TMU) and render output unit (ROP) counts move in the opposite direction. The Arc 140T Mobile includes 64 TMUs and 32 ROPs, whereas the Arc G3 uses 40 TMUs and 20 ROPs. This gives the older architecture a wider rasterization pipeline, which explains its higher pixel and texture rates. Both parts share the same API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Memory is system shared in both cases, with bandwidth dependent on the host system. The Arc 140T Mobile carries a 35 W TDP, while the Arc G3 is rated at 25 W, making the newer part more power-efficient per unit of compute. The production status for both is Active, with the Arc 140T Mobile having a release date of January 12, 2025, and the Arc G3 dated May 31, 2026.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc G3 boosts to 2400 MHz, while the Intel Arc 140T Mobile boosts to 2350 MHz. The difference is 50 MHz in favor of the Arc G3.

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare?

A: The Intel Arc G3 has 1280 shading units, which is 256 more than the 1024 shading units found in the Intel Arc 140T Mobile.

Q: Which GPU provides higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Intel Arc 140T Mobile provides 75.20 GPixel/s, which is 27.20 GPixel/s higher than the 48.00 GPixel/s of the Intel Arc G3.

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference between the two?

A: The Intel Arc G3 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc 140T Mobile delivers 4.813 TFLOPS FP32. The Arc G3 is ahead by 1.331 TFLOPS.

Q: Are both GPUs integrated or discrete?

A: Both are integrated graphics parts with an IGP slot width, a bus interface of IGP, and system-shared memory. Neither has a separate power connector.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient based on TDP?

A: The Intel Arc G3 has a TDP of 25 W, which is 10 W lower than the 35 W TDP of the Intel Arc 140T Mobile, while also offering higher FP32 throughput.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in several key specification fields. The process node moves from 5 nm (TSMC) for the Arc 140T Mobile to 3 nm (Intel) for the Arc G3. The architecture changes from Xe-LPG+ to Xe3-LPG. The chip changes from Arrow Lake-H to Panther Lake. The shading units increase from 1024 to 1280. The TMUs decrease from 64 to 40. The ROPs decrease from 32 to 20. The ray tracing cores increase from 8 to 10. The boost clock increases from 2350 MHz to 2400 MHz. The pixel rate drops from 75.20 GPixel/s to 48.00 GPixel/s. The texture rate drops from 150.4 GTexel/s to 96.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance increases from 4.813 TFLOPS to 6.144 TFLOPS. The FP16 performance increases from 9.626 TFLOPS (2:1) to 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1). The TDP decreases from 35 W to 25 W. The release date shifts from January 12, 2025 to May 31, 2026. The power connector field is null for the Arc 140T Mobile and "None" for the Arc G3. No launch MSRP is recorded for either part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for these two GPUs, and both have an average benchmark score of zero. The wins tally is zero for each side. However, the specification-derived performance metrics provide a basis for comparison. In compute throughput, the Arc G3 leads by a clear margin: its FP32 rate of 6.144 TFLOPS is 27.7% higher than the 4.813 TFLOPS of the Arc 140T Mobile. Similarly, FP16 performance reaches 12.29 TFLOPS on the Arc G3 versus 9.626 TFLOPS on the Arc 140T Mobile, a 27.6% advantage. The shading unit count of 1280 versus 1024 supports this compute lead, as does the higher boost clock of 2400 MHz versus 2350 MHz.

In rasterization-oriented metrics, the Arc 140T Mobile dominates. Its pixel rate of 75.20 GPixel/s is 56.7% higher than the 48.00 GPixel/s of the Arc G3. The texture rate of 150.4 GTexel/s is 56.7% higher than the 96.00 GTexel/s of the Arc G3. These gaps are directly explained by the larger TMU and ROP counts on the Arc 140T Mobile. The Arc G3 has fewer TMUs (40 versus 64) and fewer ROPs (20 versus 32), which limits its fill-rate capabilities even though its clock is slightly faster. The ray tracing core count favors the Arc G3 (10 versus 8), but there are no recorded ray tracing benchmark scores to quantify the impact.

Where Each One Wins

The data supports a clear split in use cases. The Intel Arc G3 is the preferred part for compute-heavy workloads. Its higher FP32 throughput, larger shading unit pool, and additional ray tracing cores make it better suited for applications that rely on shader processing, AI-style FP16 math, or geometry ray traversal. The lower TDP of 25 W also suggests it can sustain its performance in thermally constrained mobile chassis, while still delivering more raw compute than the Arc 140T Mobile. The Xe3-LPG architecture on a 3 nm Intel node indicates a newer design that may extract more performance per clock in general-purpose tasks.

The Intel Arc 140T Mobile is the better choice for fill-rate-bound scenarios. Its 56.7% higher pixel rate and 56.7% higher texture rate mean it can handle traditional 3D rendering at higher resolutions or with more aggressive post-processing effects that stress the ROP and TMU stages. This advantage comes from having 32 ROPs and 64 TMUs, which are 60% and 60% higher than the Arc G3’s 20 ROPs and 40 TMUs, respectively. For older DirectX 11-style workloads or games that do not scale well with compute units, the Arc 140T Mobile’s wider raster pipeline may deliver smoother frame pacing. The 35 W TDP indicates a higher power ceiling, which could allow sustained fill-rate performance in systems with adequate cooling.

In summary, the Arc G3 wins on compute density and efficiency, while the Arc 140T Mobile wins on rasterization throughput. Neither part has recorded benchmark scores in the database, so these conclusions are drawn strictly from the architectural and specification data. The identical 50th percentile ranking suggests that, across the broader GPU landscape, both parts occupy a similar mid-range position for integrated graphics, but their strengths diverge sharply by workload type.