Intel Arc 140T Mobile vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for the Intel Arc 140T Mobile against the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile. However, the available figures for the RTX 3050 A Mobile allow for a meaningful comparison against its nearest rivals, providing context for its performance tier.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile posts an average benchmark score of 8746, placing it at the 44th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2, scores 8743, a delta of 0 percent, indicating essentially identical average performance. The Quadro P2200 trails by a margin of 0.7 percent with a score of 8686, while the AMD Radeon R9 M265X sits 1.2 percent ahead at 8851. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 leads the group by 1.3 percent with a score of 8863.

Looking at the sub-scores for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, the data shows a peak in DirectX 9 performance with a Passmark score of 152, while DirectX 11 reaches 94 and DirectX 10 hits 61. DirectX 12 performance drops to 55, indicating a notable regression in the newest API relative to the older ones. The G3D score of 11664 represents the primary gaming metric, while the GPU compute score of 4419 reflects general-purpose throughput. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 52998 provides an additional cross-API reference point.

The Intel Arc 140T Mobile has no benchmark scores recorded in the database, and its percentile rank of 50 is listed without supporting average score data. This absence of measured results means the database cannot currently substantiate a direct comparison of compute or gaming workloads between the two parts. The RTX 3050 A Mobile, by contrast, has a full suite of recorded tests across multiple APIs and workloads.

For the FP32 peak throughput, both GPUs are mathematically identical at 4.813 TFLOPS. This is a rare occurrence in the database, as two different architectures from different manufacturers converge on the same theoretical single-precision rate. The RTX 3050 A Mobile achieves this with 1792 shading units at a boost clock of 1343 MHz, while the Arc 140T reaches the same figure with 1024 shading units at a higher boost of 2350 MHz.

Pixel throughput diverges sharply. The Arc 140T delivers 75.20 GPixel/s against the RTX 3050 A Mobile's 42.98 GPixel/s, a 74.9 percent advantage for the Intel part. Texture rate, however, is nearly identical: 150.4 GTexel/s for the Arc versus 75.21 GTexel/s for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, which is actually a 100 percent difference in favor of Intel, not a near parity as the rounded figures might suggest. The RTX 3050 A Mobile's 56 TMUs at 1343 MHz produce 75.21 GTexel/s, while the Arc's 64 TMUs at 2350 MHz yield 150.4 GTexel/s.

FP16 throughput also differs by architecture. The Arc 140T reaches 9.626 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, double its FP32 rate. The RTX 3050 A Mobile runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, matching its FP32 figure at 4.813 TFLOPS. This indicates the Intel architecture offers a significant advantage in half-precision workloads, while the NVIDIA part does not accelerate FP16 at all.

FAQ

Q: How does the RTX 3050 A Mobile compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile's average score of 8746 places it within 1.3 percent of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (8863), the AMD Radeon R9 M265X (8851), and the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (8686). The closest match is the GeForce GTX 460 v2 at 8743, with a delta of 0 percent.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc 140T Mobile sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile is at the 44th percentile. The Arc's percentile is listed without a corresponding average benchmark score, so the ranking is not backed by measured results in the database.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc 140T Mobile boosts to 2350 MHz, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile boosts to 1343 MHz. The Arc also has a lower base clock at 300 MHz compared to 1065 MHz for the RTX part.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc 140T Mobile uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, meaning its memory performance is tied to the host platform.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings?

A: The Intel Arc 140T Mobile is rated at 35 W, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile is rated at 45 W. The Intel part consumes 10 W less, which may affect sustained performance in thermally constrained laptop chassis.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 14 RT cores, while the Arc 140T Mobile has 8. The NVIDIA part also includes 56 tensor cores, a feature the Arc does not list.

The Verdict

The data supports distinct positioning for each GPU. The RTX 3050 A Mobile is a measured, validated part with a full benchmark suite. Its 44th percentile ranking and average score of 8746 place it in a specific performance tier, with nearest rivals clustered within 1.3 percent. The Arc 140T Mobile, in contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores, so its 50th percentile ranking cannot be independently verified from the current database entries.

For users prioritizing raw pixel throughput, the Arc 140T Mobile delivers 75.20 GPixel/s, a 74.9 percent advantage over the RTX 3050 A Mobile's 42.98 GPixel/s. For texture-heavy workloads, the Arc's 150.4 GTexel/s doubles the RTX part's 75.21 GTexel/s. These figures indicate the Intel architecture processes geometry and texture data at a substantially higher rate.

For FP32 compute, the two GPUs are tied at 4.813 TFLOPS, meaning raw single-precision throughput is not a differentiator. FP16 workloads favor the Arc 140T Mobile by a factor of two, at 9.626 TFLOPS versus 4.813 TFLOPS, but this advantage only applies to applications that use half-precision paths.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile counters with a larger shading unit count (1792 versus 1024), more RT cores (14 versus 8), and the inclusion of tensor cores (56). These resources support features the Arc does not list, and the RTX part has a dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 frame buffer with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, which removes reliance on system memory.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile is the only one of the two with measured performance data, making it the verifiable choice in the database. The Arc 140T Mobile offers higher theoretical throughput in pixel, texture, and FP16 operations, but its actual benchmark results are absent. The production status also differs: the Arc is active, while the RTX part is end-of-life.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification field. The Intel Arc 140T Mobile uses an Arrow Lake-H chip with Xe-LPG+ architecture, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile uses a GA106 chip with Ampere architecture.

Process nodes differ: the Arc is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the RTX part uses an 8 nm process at Samsung. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has known transistor counts at 12,000 million and a die size of 276 mm², with a transistor density of 43.5M per mm². The Arc lists no transistor or die size data.

Clock speeds diverge significantly. The Arc runs at a 300 MHz base and 2350 MHz boost, while the RTX part runs at 1065 MHz base and 1343 MHz boost. The memory clock for the RTX part is 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective, while the Arc uses system shared memory.

Shading units: 1024 on the Arc versus 1792 on the RTX part. TMUs: 64 versus 56. ROPs are equal at 32. RT cores: 8 versus 14. Tensor cores: none listed on the Arc versus 56 on the RTX part.

Power ratings: 35 W for the Arc, 45 W for the RTX part. The bus interface differs as well: IGP for the Arc versus PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RTX part. The RTX part lists no power connectors, and both use portable device-dependent display outputs.

Release dates: the Arc launched on 2025-01-12, while the RTX part released on 2023-12-31. The Arc's predecessor is HD Graphics-M, and the RTX part's predecessor is GeForce 20 Mobile. Production status: Active for the Arc, End-of-life for the RTX part.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is fundamental. Intel's Arc 140T Mobile uses the Xe-LPG+ architecture on Arrow Lake-H, fabricated on a 5 nm TSMC process. NVIDIA's RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the Ampere architecture on a GA106 chip, fabricated on an 8 nm Samsung process. The process node difference of 5 nm versus 8 nm is the largest manufacturing gap between the two.

The shading unit disparity reflects different design philosophies. The RTX 3050 A Mobile packs 1792 CUDA cores to reach 4.813 TFLOPS FP32 at a modest 1343 MHz boost. The Arc 140T Mobile uses 1024 shading units at a much higher 2350 MHz boost to achieve the identical FP32 rate. This indicates Intel's architecture relies on clock speed to compensate for fewer execution units.

Texture and pixel processing differ in balance. The Arc has 64 TMUs producing 150.4 GTexel/s, while the RTX part has 56 TMUs producing 75.21 GTexel/s. Both have 32 ROPs, but the Arc's higher clock yields 75.20 GPixel/s against the RTX part's 42.98 GPixel/s. The RTX 3050 A Mobile's lower pixel rate suggests its ROPs are not clocked as aggressively.

Ray tracing hardware favors NVIDIA: 14 RT cores on the RTX part versus 8 on the Arc. Tensor cores appear only on the RTX 3050 A Mobile, with 56 of them present. The Arc lists no tensor core count at all.

Memory architecture is categorically different. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc 140T Mobile uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, meaning its memory subsystem is not self-contained and its performance varies with the host platform's memory configuration.

FP16 processing differs in ratio. The Arc achieves 9.626 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, indicating dedicated half-precision execution. The RTX part runs FP16 at 1:1, meaning it processes half-precision at the same rate as single-precision without acceleration.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature parity exists at the highest level. The manufacturing foundries differ (TSMC versus Samsung), and the RTX part has a known die size of 276 mm², while the Arc's die size is unlisted.