Intel Arc 140V Mobile vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

Intel Arc 140V Mobile and NVIDIA N1 16SM are both integrated graphics processors, but they target very different segments of the mobile market. The Arc 140V is built on Intel’s Lunar Lake chip using the Xe2-LPG architecture, while the N1 16SM is part of NVIDIA’s Blackwell IGP family based on the GB20B chip. The database records show no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for these two parts, so the comparison below relies entirely on their recorded specifications, architecture details, and derived performance metrics.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no measured benchmark scores for either the Intel Arc 140V Mobile or the NVIDIA N1 16SM. Both entries show an average benchmark score of 0 and an empty list of nearest rivals. Consequently, there are no exact performance numbers from benchmark runs to compare directly. Instead, the analysis must derive relative performance from the recorded compute rates, pixel throughput, and texture rates.

The most striking difference in raw compute throughput is in FP32 floating-point performance. The NVIDIA N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS, while the Intel Arc 140V Mobile provides 3.994 TFLOPS. This means the N1 16SM has approximately 2.4 times the FP32 throughput of the Arc 140V. In practical terms, the N1 16SM processes roughly 5.6 TFLOPS more per second in single-precision workloads.

Texture rate follows a similar pattern. The N1 16SM achieves 300.3 GTexel/s, compared to 124.8 GTexel/s for the Arc 140V. That is a 2.4 times advantage in favor of the NVIDIA part. The N1 16SM can sample and filter textures more than twice as fast, which directly benefits fill-rate-bound rendering scenes.

Pixel rate, however, tells a different story. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile records 62.40 GPixel/s, slightly ahead of the N1 16SM’s 56.30 GPixel/s. The Arc 140V leads by roughly 11 percent in pixel throughput, meaning it can write more pixels to the framebuffer per second. This edge is modest but measurable, and it stems from the Arc 140V’s higher pixel rate despite having fewer shading units.

Clock speeds also differ significantly. The N1 16SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. The Arc 140V starts at 300 MHz and boosts to 1950 MHz. The NVIDIA part’s boost clock is about 20 percent higher than Intel’s, which helps explain its superior FP32 and texture throughput.

In terms of memory bandwidth, the N1 16SM records 273.2 GB/s from its 256-bit LPDDR5X interface, while the Arc 140V uses system-shared memory with bandwidth listed as system dependent. The N1 16SM’s dedicated bandwidth figure is substantially higher than what a typical integrated GPU with shared memory would provide, though the Arc 140V’s actual bandwidth cannot be quantified from the database.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA N1 16SM wins decisively in compute-heavy tasks. Its FP32 throughput of 9.609 TFLOPS is 2.4 times the Arc 140V’s 3.994 TFLOPS. This advantage applies to general-purpose GPU compute, physics simulations, and any workload that relies heavily on single-precision floating-point math. The N1 16SM also leads in texture processing with 300.3 GTexel/s versus 124.8 GTexel/s, making it the stronger choice for scenes with complex texture filtering and multi-textured surfaces.

The N1 16SM also has a clear edge in ray tracing resources. It contains 16 RT cores, while the Arc 140V has 8. This doubling of RT core count, combined with higher compute throughput, suggests the NVIDIA part can handle more demanding ray-traced effects, though no specific ray-tracing benchmarks are recorded.

The Intel Arc 140V Mobile wins in pixel output. Its 62.40 GPixel/s exceeds the N1 16SM’s 56.30 GPixel/s. For applications that are pixel-rate limited, such as high-resolution rendering with heavy overdraw or simple fragment shaders, the Arc 140V holds an advantage. The Arc 140V also consumes a recorded 37 W TDP, whereas the N1 16SM’s TDP is unknown, so power efficiency cannot be directly compared.

Another area where the Arc 140V distinguishes itself is API support. It lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 16SM lists N/A for all three APIs. This means the Arc 140V is compatible with modern graphics APIs and can run a wide range of current software, while the N1 16SM’s API compatibility is not documented in the database. This makes the Arc 140V a more versatile option for general-purpose computing and gaming, assuming software supports the hardware.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc 140V Mobile uses the Xe2-LPG architecture on a 3 nm process node, fabricated by TSMC. Its die size is 172 mm². The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses Blackwell 2.0 architecture on a 5 nm process node, also from TSMC, with a larger die size of 382 mm². The Arc 140V’s smaller process node and die suggest a more compact design, while the N1 16SM’s larger die accommodates more processing units.

Shader resources differ substantially. The N1 16SM has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The Arc 140V has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The N1 16SM doubles the shading unit count and TMU count, but the Arc 140V has 8 more ROPs. This explains the pixel rate advantage of the Intel part despite its lower overall compute resources.

Ray tracing cores are present on both, but the N1 16SM has 16 versus the Arc 140V’s 8. Tensor cores are only listed for the NVIDIA part, which has 64 tensor cores; the Arc 140V’s tensor core count is listed as null. This indicates the N1 16SM includes dedicated tensor hardware, likely for AI and machine learning workloads, while the Arc 140V does not document such units.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The Arc 140V uses system-shared memory, meaning it relies on the host system’s RAM with no dedicated VRAM. The N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, with a fixed bandwidth of 273.2 GB/s. The N1 16SM’s memory clock is listed as 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective, while the Arc 140V’s memory clock is marked as system shared. This dedicated memory configuration gives the N1 16SM a major advantage in bandwidth and capacity for graphics workloads.

Process node and die size also affect power characteristics, though the N1 16SM’s TDP is unknown. The Arc 140V is rated at 37 W, and its 3 nm process likely contributes to lower power draw, but without N1 16SM TDP data, no direct comparison is possible.

Specification Differences

The most obvious specification difference is memory capacity. The N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X, while the Arc 140V uses system-shared memory with no dedicated size. The N1 16SM’s memory bus is 256 bit, while the Arc 140V’s bus width is system shared. Bandwidth follows the same pattern: 273.2 GB/s for the N1 16SM versus system dependent for the Arc 140V.

Clock speeds differ across all ranges. The N1 16SM’s base clock is 741 MHz and boost clock is 2346 MHz. The Arc 140V’s base clock is 300 MHz and boost clock is 1950 MHz. The N1 16SM also has a dedicated memory clock of 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective, whereas the Arc 140V lists memory clock as system shared.

Compute unit counts diverge sharply. The N1 16SM has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 24 ROPs, 16 RT cores, and 64 tensor cores. The Arc 140V has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 RT cores, with no tensor core count. The N1 16SM’s higher counts in shading units, TMUs, RT cores, and tensor cores give it a clear specification advantage in most categories, except ROPs where the Arc 140V leads.

The bus interface also differs. The N1 16SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Arc 140V uses an IGP bus interface. Display outputs are listed as 1x HDMI for the N1 16SM, while the Arc 140V’s outputs are portable device dependent. The N1 16SM has no power connectors, and the Arc 140V also lists no power connectors, but the Arc 140V’s TDP is recorded at 37 W while the N1 16SM’s TDP is unknown.

Production status is active for both. The Arc 140V was released on 2024-09-23, while the N1 16SM has a release date of 2026-05-31. The Arc 140V lists its predecessor as HD Graphics-M, while the N1 16SM has no predecessor recorded. Neither part has a successor listed.

API support is a major differentiator. The Arc 140V supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 16SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. This suggests the N1 16SM may not be intended for traditional graphics API workloads, or its API support is not documented, while the Arc 140V is fully compatible with mainstream graphics frameworks.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM records 9.609 TFLOPS, while the Intel Arc 140V Mobile records 3.994 TFLOPS. The N1 16SM provides approximately 2.4 times the single-precision floating-point throughput.

Q: Does the Intel Arc 140V Mobile have better pixel fill rate than the NVIDIA N1 16SM?

A: Yes. The Arc 140V achieves 62.40 GPixel/s, compared to the N1 16SM’s 56.30 GPixel/s. The Intel part leads by about 11 percent in pixel throughput.

Q: What memory configuration does the NVIDIA N1 16SM use?

A: The N1 16SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, with 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective). The Arc 140V uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM has 16 RT cores, while the Intel Arc 140V Mobile has 8 RT cores. The N1 16SM doubles the ray tracing core count.

Q: What graphics APIs does the Intel Arc 140V Mobile support?

A: The Arc 140V supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1 16SM lists N/A for all three APIs.

Q: What are the process nodes for these two GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc 140V Mobile uses a 3 nm process node from TSMC with a die size of 172 mm². The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses a 5 nm process node from TSMC with a die size of 382 mm².

The Verdict

Based on the recorded data, the NVIDIA N1 16SM is the stronger compute performer. It delivers 2.4 times the FP32 throughput of the Intel Arc 140V Mobile, doubles the texture rate with 300.3 GTexel/s versus 124.8 GTexel/s, and has double the RT cores and 64 tensor cores where the Arc 140V has none listed. Its 128 GB of dedicated LPDDR5X memory with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth provides a substantial advantage over the Arc 140V’s system-shared memory. For any workload that depends on raw compute, texture filtering, ray tracing, or AI acceleration, the N1 16SM is the clear choice.

The Intel Arc 140V Mobile wins in pixel output, with 62.40 GPixel/s over the N1 16SM’s 56.30 GPixel/s. It also has full support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the N1 16SM’s API support is undocumented. The Arc 140V records a 37 W TDP, and its 3 nm process node indicates a more power-efficient design, though the N1 16SM’s TDP is unknown. For users who need broad software compatibility and higher pixel fill rates, the Arc 140V is the more suitable option.

The two GPUs serve different purposes. The N1 16SM appears optimized for high-bandwidth, compute-intensive tasks with dedicated memory and advanced tensor hardware. The Arc 140V is a more conventional integrated GPU with modern API support and a slight pixel rate edge. The database shows no benchmark scores for either, so these conclusions derive entirely from specification analysis. Based on the recorded specifications, the N1 16SM provides superior performance in most measurable categories, while the Arc 140V holds advantages in pixel rate and API compatibility.