Intel Arc 140V Mobile vs NVIDIA Rubin GPU Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core specifications of the Intel Arc 140V Mobile and the NVIDIA Rubin GPU?

A: The Intel Arc 140V Mobile uses the Xe2-LPG architecture on a 3 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 172 mm². It has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 RT cores. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU uses the Rubin architecture on the same 3 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 1456 mm² and 336,000 million transistors. It features 28672 shading units, 896 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 896 tensor cores.

Q: How do the clock speeds compare between the two GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc 140V Mobile has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1950 MHz. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has a base clock of 700 MHz and a boost clock of 2267 MHz. The Rubin GPU's memory runs at 2695 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective speed, while the Arc 140V Mobile uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs use?

A: The Intel Arc 140V Mobile uses system shared memory, meaning its memory size, type, and bus width are all system dependent. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has 288 GB of HBM4 memory on a 16384-bit bus, delivering 22.1 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Intel Arc 140V Mobile has a TDP of 37 W and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP). The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has a TDP of 2300 W, is an SXM module, and requires a suggested PSU of 2700 W.

Q: Which GPU has higher compute throughput in FP32 operations?

A: The NVIDIA Rubin GPU delivers 130.0 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is substantially higher than the Intel Arc 140V Mobile's 3.994 TFLOPS. In FP16 operations, the Rubin GPU achieves 260.0 TFLOPS (2:1) versus the Arc 140V Mobile's 7.987 TFLOPS (2:1).

Q: What are the API support differences?

A: The Intel Arc 140V Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has no API support listed, with DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all marked as N/A, and it has no display outputs.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies and market targets. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile is built on the Lunar Lake chip using the Xe2-LPG architecture, part of the Arc Graphics-M generation. It is a 3 nm TSMC part with a die size of 172 mm². The NVIDIA Rubin GPU is a server-class part built on the GR100 chip using the Rubin architecture, part of the Server Rubin (Rxx) generation. It uses the same 3 nm TSMC process but with a vastly larger die at 1456 mm², containing 336,000 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 230.8M per mm².

The Intel Arc 140V Mobile is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a bus interface of IGP, meaning it shares system memory and its display outputs are portable device dependent. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU is an SXM module with a PCIe 6.0 x16 bus interface and no display outputs, indicating it is designed for server and datacenter deployment rather than consumer display output.

Compute resources differ drastically. The Arc 140V Mobile has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units, alongside 8 ray tracing cores. The Rubin GPU has 28672 shading units, 896 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with no dedicated RT cores listed but 896 tensor cores for AI acceleration. The pixel rates are comparable despite the massive core count difference: the Arc 140V Mobile achieves 62.40 GPixel/s while the Rubin GPU achieves 54.41 GPixel/s, due to the Rubin's lower ROP count relative to its shading units.

The Intel part supports a full consumer API stack including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the NVIDIA server part lists no API support and no display outputs, confirming its role as a compute accelerator rather than a graphics card.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no benchmark scores for either GPU in the head-to-head comparison, with zero wins recorded for each side. However, the specification data provides clear performance indicators. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU delivers 130.0 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is approximately 32.5 times the Intel Arc 140V Mobile's 3.994 TFLOPS. In FP16 operations, the Rubin GPU's 260.0 TFLOPS (2:1) is approximately 32.6 times the Arc 140V Mobile's 7.987 TFLOPS (2:1).

Texture throughput strongly favors the Rubin GPU, with 2,031.2 GTexel/s versus the Arc 140V Mobile's 124.8 GTexel/s, representing a roughly 16.3 times advantage. This difference is driven by the Rubin's 896 TMUs compared to the Arc's 64 TMUs, combined with higher clock speeds.

Pixel throughput is the closest specification category. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile achieves 62.40 GPixel/s, while the NVIDIA Rubin GPU achieves 54.41 GPixel/s, giving the Intel part a 14.7% advantage in this metric. This occurs because the Arc 140V Mobile has 32 ROPs versus the Rubin's 24 ROPs, and the Arc's boost clock of 1950 MHz, while lower than the Rubin's 2267 MHz, is not sufficiently lower to offset the ROP count difference.

Memory bandwidth is a decisive differentiator. The Rubin GPU's 22.1 TB/s over a 16384-bit HBM4 interface stands in stark contrast to the Arc 140V Mobile's system-dependent shared memory, which has no fixed bandwidth figure recorded. The Rubin's 288 GB memory capacity far exceeds what any integrated GPU can access through shared system memory.

Clock behavior also differs. The Rubin GPU boosts to 2267 MHz from a 700 MHz base, a 224% increase, while the Intel part boosts to 1950 MHz from a 300 MHz base, a 550% increase. The Arc 140V Mobile's wider relative boost range indicates aggressive power management typical of mobile integrated graphics.

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two GPUs into entirely different performance classes and use cases. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU is a server-class compute accelerator with 28672 shading units, 896 tensor cores, 288 GB of HBM4 memory, and 22.1 TB/s of bandwidth, delivering 130.0 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The Intel Arc 140V Mobile is a mobile integrated GPU with 1024 shading units, 8 RT cores, and system shared memory, delivering 3.994 TFLOPS of FP32 compute.

For anyone requiring maximum compute throughput, the Rubin GPU is the only choice, offering approximately 32.5 times the FP32 performance and 32.6 times the FP16 performance of the Arc 140V Mobile. Its 2300 W TDP and SXM module form factor, however, make it suitable only for server environments with a 2700 W suggested PSU.

For mobile and portable devices, the Intel Arc 140V Mobile is the appropriate option, with a 37 W TDP, integrated form factor, and full consumer API support including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4. The Rubin GPU has no display outputs and no API support, making it unsuitable for any consumer graphics workload.

The pixel rate advantage of the Intel part (62.40 GPixel/s versus 54.41 GPixel/s) is an interesting anomaly but does not change the overall verdict. The Rubin GPU's massive advantages in shading units, texture units, tensor cores, memory capacity, and bandwidth place it in a completely different performance tier.

Specification Differences

The following specification fields differ between the Intel Arc 140V Mobile and the NVIDIA Rubin GPU:

• Chip: Lunar Lake versus GR100
• Architecture: Xe2-LPG versus Rubin
• Generation: Arc Graphics-M (Lunar Lake) versus Server Rubin (Rxx)
• Transistors: unknown versus 336,000 million
• Die Size: 172 mm² versus 1456 mm²
• Transistor Density: not listed versus 230.8M / mm²
• Base Clock: 300 MHz versus 700 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1950 MHz versus 2267 MHz
• Memory Clock: System Shared versus 2695 MHz 10.8 Gbps effective
• Memory Size: System Shared versus 288 GB
• Memory Type: System Shared versus HBM4
• Memory Bus Width: System Shared versus 16384 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: System Dependent versus 22.1 TB/s
• Shading Units: 1024 versus 28672
• TMUs: 64 versus 896
• ROPs: 32 versus 24
• RT Cores: 8 versus not listed
• Tensor Cores: not listed versus 896
• Pixel Rate: 62.40 GPixel/s versus 54.41 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 124.8 GTexel/s versus 2,031.2 GTexel/s
• FP32: 3.994 TFLOPS versus 130.0 TFLOPS
• FP16: 7.987 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 260.0 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 37 W versus 2300 W
• Slot Width: IGP versus SXM Module
• Suggested PSU: not listed versus 2700 W
• Bus Interface: IGP versus PCIe 6.0 x16
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent versus No outputs
• DirectX: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus N/A
• OpenGL: 4.6 versus N/A
• Vulkan: 1.4 versus N/A
• Release Date: 2024-09-23 versus 2025-12-31
• Predecessor: HD Graphics-M versus Server Blackwell

Where Each One Wins

Intel Arc 140V Mobile wins in mobile integration and consumer graphics. The data shows that the Arc 140V Mobile is the only one of the two with display outputs and consumer API support. It has a 37 W TDP, making it suitable for laptops and portable devices, while the Rubin GPU requires 2300 W and an SXM module form factor. The Arc 140V Mobile also has the higher pixel rate at 62.40 GPixel/s versus 54.41 GPixel/s, and it includes 8 dedicated ray tracing cores, which the Rubin GPU does not list. Its earlier release date of 2024-09-23 and predecessor HD Graphics-M indicate a consumer-focused lineage.

NVIDIA Rubin GPU wins in raw compute and memory bandwidth. The Rubin GPU dominates in every compute metric that matters for server workloads. It delivers 130.0 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 3.994 TFLOPS, 260.0 TFLOPS of FP16 versus 7.987 TFLOPS, and 2,031.2 GTexel/s of texture throughput versus 124.8 GTexel/s. Its 288 GB of HBM4 memory on a 16384-bit bus provides 22.1 TB/s of bandwidth, while the Arc 140V Mobile relies on system-dependent shared memory. The 896 tensor cores provide AI acceleration capability that the Arc 140V Mobile lacks entirely. The Rubin GPU's 28672 shading units and 896 TMUs give it a 28 times advantage in shading units and a 14 times advantage in texture units over the Intel part.

Use case split: The Intel Arc 140V Mobile is for portable devices requiring integrated graphics with DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, plus ray tracing capability. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU is for server deployments requiring massive parallel compute, tensor operations, and high-bandwidth memory, with no display output functionality. The Rubin GPU's 2300 W TDP and 2700 W suggested PSU place it firmly in datacenter infrastructure, while the Arc 140V Mobile's 37 W TDP suits battery-powered mobile systems.