Intel Arc 140V Mobile vs Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for the Intel Arc 140V Mobile and the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile. Both parts share a percentileVsAllGpus value of 50, which places them at the median of all tracked GPUs, indicating that neither part is positioned as an outlier in either direction within the overall performance distribution. The avgBenchmarkScore for both is 0, meaning no aggregate score has been computed from submitted runs. The absence of head-to-head results means that direct performance deltas cannot be quoted from the database. However, the underlying specification data allows for a comparative analysis of compute throughput, fill rates, and architectural resource allocation. The Arc 140V Mobile delivers 3.994 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile delivers 2.355 TFLOPS. That difference represents a 1.639 TFLOPS advantage for the Arc 140V, which is approximately 69.6% higher FP32 throughput based on the recorded figures. FP16 performance follows the same proportional gap, with the Arc 140V at 7.987 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 4.710 TFLOPS (2:1) for the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile. Texture rate favors the Arc 140V at 124.8 GTexel/s against 73.60 GTexel/s, a gap of 51.2 GTexel/s. Pixel rate shows 62.40 GPixel/s for the Arc 140V versus 36.80 GPixel/s for the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile, a difference of 25.60 GPixel/s.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded data, the Intel Arc 140V Mobile wins in every compute and fill-rate category. It doubles the shading units, with 1024 versus 512, and doubles the texture mapping units, with 64 versus 32. The raster operation units also double, 32 versus 16, and the ray tracing cores double as well, 8 versus 4. The boost clock is the single category where the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile leads, reaching 2300 MHz compared to 1950 MHz for the Arc 140V. That 350 MHz higher boost clock does not compensate for the halved resource count. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile also has a lower TDP at 25 W versus 37 W, which positions it as the more power-constrained part in the pair. The Arc 140V uses a 3 nm process from TSMC, while the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses a 3 nm process from Intel. Both are integrated graphics processors with system-shared memory, so memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are identical in classification: System Shared, System Shared, System Shared, and System Dependent respectively. The Arc 140V is the stronger candidate for workloads that scale with raw shader count, texture throughput, and pixel output. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is the part with the higher boost clock and lower power envelope, which may indicate a different design target within the same integrated graphics class.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units, the Intel Arc 140V Mobile or the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile?

A: The Intel Arc 140V Mobile has 1024 shading units, while the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has 512 shading units.

Q: What are the FP32 compute figures for both parts?

A: The Intel Arc 140V Mobile delivers 3.994 TFLOPS, and the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile delivers 2.355 TFLOPS.

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has a boost clock of 2300 MHz, which is 350 MHz higher than the 1950 MHz boost clock of the Intel Arc 140V Mobile.

Q: How do the ray tracing cores compare?

A: The Intel Arc 140V Mobile has 8 ray tracing cores, and the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has 4 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the TDP of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc 140V Mobile has a TDP of 37 W, and the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has a TDP of 25 W.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same API feature levels?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly all compute resources. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile uses the Lunar Lake chip with the Xe2-LPG architecture, while the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses the Panther Lake chip with the Xe3-LPG architecture. The process node is 3 nm for both, but the foundry differs: TSMC for the Arc 140V and Intel for the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile. The die size is recorded as 172 mm² for the Arc 140V, while the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has an unknown die size. Transistor counts are unknown for both. Base clocks are identical at 300 MHz, but boost clocks differ at 1950 MHz versus 2300 MHz. Shading units are 1024 versus 512. TMUs are 64 versus 32. ROPs are 32 versus 16. Ray tracing cores are 8 versus 4. Pixel rate is 62.40 GPixel/s versus 36.80 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 124.8 GTexel/s versus 73.60 GTexel/s. FP32 is 3.994 TFLOPS versus 2.355 TFLOPS. FP16 is 7.987 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 4.710 TFLOPS (2:1). TDP is 37 W versus 25 W. The power connector field lists no connector for the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile, while the Arc 140V has a null value for that field. The release date for the Arc 140V is 2024-09-23, and for the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile it is 2026-01-26. The Arc 140V has a predecessor listed as HD Graphics-M; the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has no predecessor. Neither part has a successor listed, and neither has a launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is defined by generation and design approach. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile is built on Xe2-LPG, the architecture used in the Lunar Lake generation, and it represents the Arc Graphics-M (Lunar Lake) product line. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is built on Xe3-LPG, the architecture used in the Panther Lake generation, and it represents the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) product line. The newer Xe3-LPG architecture arrives with fewer execution resources per GPU, which is reflected in the halved shading units, TMUs, ROPs, and ray tracing cores. The Arc 140V does not use a dedicated memory bus; all memory parameters are system-shared and system-dependent, and the same applies to the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile. Both GPUs are integrated parts with an IGP slot width and IGP bus interface. The display outputs for both are marked as Portable Device Dependent. Both support the same API set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Arc 140V has a die size of 172 mm² and uses TSMC as the foundry. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has an unknown die size and uses Intel as the foundry. The production status for both is Active. The Arc 140V traces its predecessor to HD Graphics-M, while the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has no recorded predecessor. The compute ratio between the two parts is consistent across all measured throughput categories: the Arc 140V delivers roughly 1.7 times the FP32, FP16, pixel, and texture throughput of the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile, based on the recorded figures.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Arc 140V Mobile is the stronger integrated GPU in raw throughput and resource allocation. It doubles the shading units, TMUs, ROPs, and ray tracing cores of the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile, and it delivers higher pixel rate, texture rate, FP32, and FP16 figures across the board. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile counters with a higher boost clock of 2300 MHz and a lower TDP of 25 W, which makes it the more power-efficient part on paper. The Arc 140V uses a 172 mm² die on TSMC 3 nm, while the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses an unknown die size on Intel 3 nm. The newer Xe3-LPG architecture in the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile does not translate into a resource advantage in the recorded specifications. The Arc 140V is the part to select for workloads that depend on shader throughput, texture filtering, pixel fill, or ray tracing capacity. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is the part with the higher clock ceiling and the lower power draw, which suits thermally constrained portable designs. The database shows a percentileVsAllGpus of 50 for both, meaning neither part is recorded as an above-median performer in the full GPU distribution. Neither part has benchmark scores in the database, so the verdict is based entirely on specification-derived throughput comparisons. The Arc 140V is the clear compute leader; the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is the efficiency-oriented counterpart with a newer architecture generation.