Intel Arc 140T Mobile vs NVIDIA H20 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct benchmark scores for either the Intel Arc 140T Mobile or the NVIDIA H20. Both entries show an average benchmark score of 0, and the head-to-head benchmark array is empty. This absence of recorded performance data means the comparison must rely entirely on the architectural specifications and derived computational metrics provided in the database.

The raw compute figures reveal a stark contrast. The Intel Arc 140T Mobile delivers 4.813 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the NVIDIA H20 reaches 39.54 TFLOPS. That places the H20 at roughly 8.2 times the FP32 compute of the Intel part. In FP16, the gap widens further: the Intel GPU achieves 9.626 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), whereas the H20 produces 79.07 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), a margin of approximately 8.2 times again.

Texture throughput tells a similar story. The Arc 140T Mobile renders 150.4 GTexel/s, while the H20 manages 617.8 GTexel/s, roughly 4.1 times faster. Pixel rate, however, favors the Intel part: 75.20 GPixel/s versus 47.52 GPixel/s for the H20. This is a notable inversion, driven by the H20's unusually low ROP count of 24 against the Intel GPU's 32 ROPs, combined with the H20's lower boost clock relative to its massive shading unit count.

The shading unit disparity is enormous. The Arc 140T Mobile contains 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The H20 packs 9984 shading units, 312 TMUs, and just 24 ROPs. The tensor core count also diverges completely: the Intel GPU lists none, while the H20 carries 312 tensor cores. The Intel part has 8 ray tracing cores; the H20 lists no dedicated RT cores at all.

Clock behavior differs substantially. The Intel Arc 140T Mobile runs at a 300 MHz base clock and boosts to 2350 MHz. The NVIDIA H20 operates at 1830 MHz base and 1980 MHz boost. Despite the Intel part's higher boost frequency, its much smaller execution resource pool cannot compensate for the H20's raw scale.

Memory configurations could not be more different. The Intel GPU uses system shared memory, with system-dependent bandwidth and no dedicated VRAM. The H20 features 96 GB of HBM3 on a 6144-bit bus, delivering 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock for the H20 is 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective transfer rate. The Intel part's memory clock is likewise listed as system shared, meaning no fixed figure exists.

The Verdict

The recorded data indicates two products built for entirely separate purposes. The Intel Arc 140T Mobile is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 35 W TDP, designed for portable devices. The NVIDIA H20 is an SXM module with a 500 W TDP, a suggested PSU of 900 W, and PCIe 5.0 x16 connectivity, intended for server deployment. Their production statuses are both active, but the release dates differ: the Intel part launched on January 12, 2025, while the H20 appeared on January 31, 2024.

From a pure compute standpoint, the H20 dominates. Its FP32 performance is 39.54 TFLOPS versus 4.813 TFLOPS for the Arc 140T Mobile. Its FP16 output of 79.07 TFLOPS dwarfs the Intel GPU's 9.626 TFLOPS. Texture rate favors the H20 at 617.8 GTexel/s against 150.4 GTexel/s. The H20's memory bandwidth of 4.03 TB/s is unmatched by the Intel part's system-shared arrangement, which has no fixed bandwidth figure.

The Intel Arc 140T Mobile wins only in pixel fill rate, 75.20 GPixel/s versus 47.52 GPixel/s, and in having display outputs (portable device dependent) where the H20 has no outputs at all. The H20 also lacks any DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan API support, while the Intel part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Both GPUs sit at the 50th percentile in the database's overall ranking, with no rival comparison data available. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP, so no pricing information can be stated.

The data suggests the H20 is a compute accelerator for server environments where graphics APIs are irrelevant and raw throughput matters. The Arc 140T Mobile is a graphics solution for mobile devices, where power draw, integrated design, and display output capability are essential. The 500 W TDP of the H20 versus the 35 W TDP of the Intel part reinforces this division.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc 140T Mobile uses the Arrow Lake-H chip with the Xe-LPG+ architecture, belonging to the Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) generation. The NVIDIA H20 uses the GH100 chip with the Hopper architecture, part of the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation. Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the similarities end there.

The H20's die is 814 mm² with 80,000 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 98.3M per mm². The Intel part's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown, so no density can be calculated. The H20 is a massive chip, while the Intel GPU is an integrated solution with no discrete dimensions recorded.

Clock structures differ. The Intel GPU has a 300 MHz base and 2350 MHz boost. The H20 has a 1830 MHz base and 1980 MHz boost. The H20's memory runs at 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective, whereas the Intel GPU's memory clock is system shared. The H20's memory is 96 GB of HBM3 on a 6144-bit bus. The Intel part uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth.

The H20 includes 312 tensor cores, reflecting its Hopper architecture's focus on AI and matrix operations. The Intel GPU lists no tensor cores but includes 8 ray tracing cores. The H20 lists no RT cores. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The H20 reports N/A for all three graphics APIs, confirming its non-rendering role.

The Intel GPU is an IGP with a slot width of IGP and bus interface of IGP. The H20 is an SXM Module with a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface. The Intel part has portable device dependent display outputs; the H20 has no outputs. The Intel GPU's predecessor is HD Graphics-M, while the H20's predecessor is Server Ada and its successor is Server Blackwell. The Intel part's successor is not recorded.

Power envelopes are extreme. The Intel GPU draws 35 W, while the H20 consumes 500 W with a suggested PSU of 900 W. Neither lists power connectors.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA H20 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32, while the Intel Arc 140T Mobile produces 4.813 TFLOPS, making the H20 roughly 8.2 times faster in this metric.

Q: Does the Intel Arc 140T Mobile support any graphics APIs?

A: Yes, the database lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support for the Intel Arc 140T Mobile.

Q: What memory configuration does the NVIDIA H20 use?

A: The H20 uses 96 GB of HBM3 memory on a 6144-bit bus, with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 1313 MHz (5.3 Gbps effective).

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Intel Arc 140T Mobile achieves 75.20 GPixel/s, compared to 47.52 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA H20, giving the Intel part the advantage in pixel rate.

Q: Are the process nodes different between the two GPUs?

A: Both the Intel Arc 140T Mobile and the NVIDIA H20 are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, so the process node is identical.

Q: Does the NVIDIA H20 have display outputs?

A: No, the database records "No outputs" for the NVIDIA H20, while the Intel Arc 140T Mobile has portable device dependent display outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc 140T Mobile wins in pixel fill rate, delivering 75.20 GPixel/s against the H20's 47.52 GPixel/s. This advantage comes from its 32 ROPs and 2350 MHz boost clock, which exceeds the H20's 1980 MHz boost. The Intel part also holds the only graphics API support in the comparison, with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it suitable for rendering workloads where the H20 cannot operate at all.

The Intel GPU's 35 W TDP positions it for low-power mobile integration. Its IGP slot width and bus interface mean it requires no separate power delivery or expansion slot. The portable device dependent display outputs confirm its role in laptops or handheld devices where the H20's absence of outputs would be disqualifying.

The NVIDIA H20 wins decisively in raw compute. Its 39.54 TFLOPS FP32 and 79.07 TFLOPS FP16 outputs are roughly 8.2 times the Intel part's figures. Texture rate stands at 617.8 GTexel/s versus 150.4 GTexel/s, about 4.1 times higher. The H20's 9984 shading units and 312 TMUs vastly outnumber the Intel GPU's 1024 shading units and 64 TMUs.

Memory bandwidth is another clear H20 win. The 4.03 TB/s from HBM3 across a 6144-bit bus has no counterpart in the Intel part's system shared memory, where bandwidth is system dependent. The H20's 96 GB capacity exceeds any system shared allocation in practical terms, though the exact comparison cannot be quantified from the database.

The H20's 312 tensor cores give it a dedicated path for matrix operations that the Intel GPU lacks entirely. The H20's 500 W TDP and 900 W suggested PSU indicate a server-class power budget, appropriate for sustained compute workloads. Its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface enables host connectivity that the IGP-bound Intel part cannot match.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. Process node is the only shared field: both use 5 nm from TSMC. The Intel Arc 140T Mobile uses the Arrow Lake-H chip with Xe-LPG+ architecture, while the NVIDIA H20 uses GH100 with Hopper architecture. The Intel generation is Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake), and the H20 generation is Server Hopper (Hxx).

The H20 reports 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die with 98.3M per mm² density. The Intel part lists unknown for transistors and die size. Base clocks differ: 300 MHz for Intel versus 1830 MHz for NVIDIA. Boost clocks are 2350 MHz and 1980 MHz, respectively. Memory clocks are system shared for Intel versus 1313 MHz (5.3 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

Memory size is system shared versus 96 GB. Memory type is system shared versus HBM3. Bus width is system shared versus 6144 bit. Bandwidth is system dependent versus 4.03 TB/s. Shading units are 1024 versus 9984. TMUs are 64 versus 312. ROPs are 32 versus 24. RT cores are 8 versus none. Tensor cores are none versus 312.

Pixel rate is 75.20 GPixel/s versus 47.52 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 150.4 GTexel/s versus 617.8 GTexel/s. FP32 is 4.813 TFLOPS versus 39.54 TFLOPS. FP16 is 9.626 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 79.07 TFLOPS (2:1). TDP is 35 W versus 500 W. Slot width is IGP versus SXM Module. Suggested PSU is not listed for Intel versus 900 W for NVIDIA.

Bus interface is IGP versus PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs are portable device dependent versus no outputs. DirectX support is 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus N/A. OpenGL support is 4.6 versus N/A. Vulkan support is 1.4 versus N/A. Release dates are January 12, 2025 versus January 31, 2024. Predecessors are HD Graphics-M versus Server Ada. The H20 lists Server Blackwell as its successor; the Intel part has none recorded.