Intel Arc 140V Mobile vs NVIDIA N1X 48SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no benchmark entries for either the Intel Arc 140V Mobile or the NVIDIA N1X 48SM. As such, there are no measured performance scores, no frame rate comparisons, and no synthetic test results to draw upon. Both GPUs hold identical percentile rankings against all other GPUs in the database, each sitting at the 50th percentile, and both have an average benchmark score of zero. This absence of direct performance measurements means any head-to-head comparison must rely entirely on architectural specifications and theoretical throughput values derived from clock speeds and core counts.

Looking at raw compute throughput, the NVIDIA N1X 48SM delivers 28.83 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Arc 140V Mobile produces 3.994 TFLOPS. This represents a 7.2x difference in raw floating-point throughput in favor of the NVIDIA part. The gap widens further in texture processing, where the N1X 48SM achieves 900.9 GTexel/s against 124.8 GTexel/s for the Intel chip, a factor of 7.2x as well. Pixel fill rates tell a similar story: the NVIDIA GPU outputs 112.6 GPixel/s, whereas the Intel GPU manages 62.40 GPixel/s, a 1.8x advantage. These figures indicate that in any compute-bound or fill-rate-bound workload, the NVIDIA N1X 48SM holds a commanding theoretical lead.

The Intel Arc 140V Mobile counters with a significantly higher boost clock relative to its base clock. Its boost frequency of 1950 MHz represents a 6.5x increase over its 300 MHz base clock, whereas the NVIDIA part boosts from 741 MHz to 2346 MHz, a 3.2x multiplier. This suggests the Intel GPU has substantial headroom under load, though its absolute performance ceiling remains far below the NVIDIA part. In FP16 workloads, the Intel GPU achieves 7.987 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, while the NVIDIA GPU sustains 28.83 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, meaning the NVIDIA part does not need to sacrifice precision to reach its peak throughput.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers, process nodes, and architectural generations. Intel builds the Arc 140V Mobile on a 3 nm process at TSMC, using the Xe2-LPG architecture, which is part of the Lunar Lake chip. NVIDIA builds the N1X 48SM on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC, using the Blackwell 2.0 architecture on the GB20B chip. The die sizes differ considerably: the Intel chip measures 172 mm², while the NVIDIA chip measures 382 mm², more than double the silicon area. This larger die accommodates substantially more execution resources.

Core counts diverge sharply. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile contains 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM contains 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, 48 ROPs, and 48 RT cores. NVIDIA also includes 192 tensor cores, while the Intel part lists no tensor cores at all. The shading unit count alone favors NVIDIA by a 6x margin, and the TMU count favors NVIDIA by the same 6x factor. ROPs are closer, with NVIDIA holding a 1.5x advantage.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile uses system-shared memory, with the type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system-dependent. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock for the NVIDIA part is 1067 MHz, which translates to 8.5 Gbps effective. This dedicated memory configuration gives the NVIDIA GPU a fixed, known bandwidth figure, while the Intel GPU's memory performance depends entirely on the host system's memory configuration.

API support also differs. The Intel GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA GPU lists all APIs as N/A, meaning the database records no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support for this part. This is a notable distinction, though it does not necessarily indicate hardware incompatibility; it reflects the recorded data. The NVIDIA chip uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the Intel chip uses an integrated graphics processor (IGP) interface with no separate bus connection. The NVIDIA part also lists a single HDMI display output, while the Intel part's display outputs are portable-device dependent.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 48SM boosts to 2346 MHz, while the Intel Arc 140V Mobile boosts to 1950 MHz. The NVIDIA part's boost clock is 396 MHz higher.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile uses system-shared memory, meaning its memory size, type, and bus width depend on the host system.

Q: Do both GPUs support ray tracing?

A: Yes, both have ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile has 8 RT cores, while the NVIDIA N1X 48SM has 48 RT cores, a 6x difference.

Q: What is the FP32 performance difference?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 48SM delivers 28.83 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc 140V Mobile delivers 3.994 TFLOPS. NVIDIA's part is approximately 7.2x faster in raw FP32 throughput.

Q: Which manufacturing process is smaller?

A: Intel uses a 3 nm process at TSMC for the Arc 140V Mobile. NVIDIA uses a 5 nm process at TSMC for the N1X 48SM. The Intel process node is smaller.

Q: Are there any recorded benchmark scores for either GPU?

A: No, the database contains no benchmark entries for either GPU. Both have an average benchmark score of zero and a 50th percentile ranking.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the Intel Arc 140V Mobile and the NVIDIA N1X 48SM:

• Manufacturer: Intel versus NVIDIA
• Chip: Lunar Lake versus GB20B
• Architecture: Xe2-LPG versus Blackwell 2.0
• Generation: Arc Graphics-M (Lunar Lake) versus Blackwell IGP (N1x)
• Process Node: 3 nm versus 5 nm
• Die Size: 172 mm² versus 382 mm²
• Base Clock: 300 MHz versus 741 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1950 MHz versus 2346 MHz
• Memory Clock: System Shared versus 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective)
• Memory Size: System Shared versus 128 GB
• Memory Type: System Shared versus LPDDR5X
• Memory Bus Width: System Shared versus 256 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: System Dependent versus 273.2 GB/s
• Shading Units: 1024 versus 6144
• Texture Mapping Units: 64 versus 384
• ROPs: 32 versus 48
• Ray Tracing Cores: 8 versus 48
• Tensor Cores: None listed versus 192
• Pixel Rate: 62.40 GPixel/s versus 112.6 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 124.8 GTexel/s versus 900.9 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: 3.994 TFLOPS versus 28.83 TFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: 7.987 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 28.83 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 37 W versus unknown
• Power Connectors: None listed versus None
• Bus Interface: IGP versus PCIe 5.0 x16
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent versus 1x HDMI
• DirectX Support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus N/A
• OpenGL Support: 4.6 versus N/A
• Vulkan Support: 1.4 versus N/A
• Release Date: 2024-09-23 versus 2026-05-31
• Predecessor: HD Graphics-M versus none listed

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two GPUs by raw compute capability. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM dominates in every measured throughput category: FP32, FP16, texture rate, and pixel rate. It has 6x more shading units, 6x more TMUs, 6x more RT cores, and 1.5x more ROPs. It also includes 192 tensor cores, a feature absent from the Intel part. The NVIDIA GPU's dedicated 128 GB LPDDR5X memory with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth provides a fixed performance baseline, whereas the Intel GPU's system-shared memory introduces variability based on the host platform.

The Intel Arc 140V Mobile holds advantages in process node (3 nm versus 5 nm), power envelope (37 W TDP versus unknown), and API support. It lists full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, while the NVIDIA part records no API support in the database. The Intel part also has a smaller die (172 mm² versus 382 mm²) and an earlier release date (2024-09-23 versus 2026-05-31). These factors position the Intel GPU as a lower-power integrated solution with broad software compatibility, while the NVIDIA GPU appears as a high-throughput part with a much larger silicon footprint.

Neither GPU has recorded benchmark scores, so the verdict rests entirely on specification analysis. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM is the stronger compute device by a wide margin. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile is the more efficient design on a smaller process node, but its absolute performance ceiling is far lower.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc 140V Mobile wins in scenarios where power consumption matters, given its 37 W TDP, and where software API support is critical, given its DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility. Its system-shared memory architecture means it can operate in devices where dedicated memory is not available, and its IGP bus interface suits integrated designs. The smaller 3 nm process node and 172 mm² die suggest lower manufacturing costs per wafer and potentially better thermal behavior in compact form factors. Its release in September 2024 gives it earlier availability.

The NVIDIA N1X 48SM wins in compute-heavy and graphics-heavy workloads. Its 28.83 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 900.9 GTexel/s texture rate, and 112.6 GPixel/s pixel rate indicate suitability for tasks that stress raw shader throughput. The 192 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for tensor operations, a capability the Intel part lacks entirely. The 128 GB LPDDR5X memory pool with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth offers a massive memory capacity that no system-shared configuration can match, making it suitable for workloads that require large in-memory datasets. The 48 RT cores give it a substantial ray tracing advantage over the Intel part's 8 RT cores. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface provides a high-bandwidth connection to the host system, and the single HDMI output suggests a fixed display configuration.

The release date of 2026-05-31 places the NVIDIA part over a year and a half after the Intel part, indicating a newer product generation. The NVIDIA GPU's larger die and higher core counts come without a recorded TDP, so power characteristics cannot be compared directly. In summary, the Intel Arc 140V Mobile suits low-power integrated systems with broad API support, while the NVIDIA N1X 48SM suits performance-oriented designs that can accommodate its larger die and memory footprint.