Intel Arc A310E vs Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Arc A310E and Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile serve fundamentally different roles. The A310E is a discrete, single-slot desktop accelerator with dedicated GDDR6 memory, built for sustained workloads in compact systems. The 48EU Mobile is a 28 W integrated graphics processor embedded in Meteor Lake chips, designed for portability and power efficiency. Benchmark data shows no direct head-to-head measurements, but the architectural and specification differences are decisive. The A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 performance, more than double the 1,382.4 GFLOPS of the 48EU Mobile. It also has double the shading units (768 vs 384), double the texture mapping units (32 vs 24 is not double, but the ROP count is 16 vs 8), and a 124.0 GB/s dedicated memory bandwidth versus the system-dependent shared memory of the integrated part. The verdict is clear: for anyone needing raw compute in a small desktop or embedded system, the A310E is the stronger choice. For thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermals matter more than peak throughput, the 48EU Mobile is the only logical option, as it is an integrated part with no discrete alternative in that form factor.

Where Each One Wins

The A310E wins in every measurable performance category. Its FP32 throughput of 3.072 TFLOPS crushes the 48EU Mobile's 1,382.4 GFLOPS by a factor of 2.22. Pixel fill rate is 32.00 GPixel/s versus 14.40 GPixel/s, a 2.22x advantage. Texture fill rate is 64.00 GTexel/s versus 43.20 GTexel/s, a 1.48x advantage. The A310E also has 6 dedicated ray tracing cores, while the 48EU Mobile has none. The discrete card runs at a 2000 MHz base and boost clock, while the integrated GPU boosts to 1800 MHz with a 300 MHz base. Memory bandwidth is 124.0 GB/s on the A310E, while the 48EU Mobile relies on shared system memory with bandwidth labeled "System Dependent." The 48EU Mobile wins only in power consumption, with a 28 W TDP versus 75 W for the A310E, and in portability, as it is an IGP with no separate card dimensions. It also has a more recent release date of 2023-12-13 versus 2024-03-31 for the A310E, though the A310E's production status is "End-of-life" while the 48EU Mobile is "Active."

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different Intel architectures. The A310E uses Xe-HPG architecture on the DG2-128 chip, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It packs 7,200 million transistors into a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The 48EU Mobile uses Xe-LPG architecture on the Meteor Lake chip, fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel. Transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database for this part. The A310E is part of the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation, while the 48EU Mobile belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) generation. The A310E has a 64-bit memory bus with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the 48EU Mobile uses system shared memory with a system dependent bus width. The A310E supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the 48EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), a lower feature level. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The A310E uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the 48EU Mobile uses a Ring Bus. The A310E has 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the 48EU Mobile's display outputs are portable device dependent. The A310E's predecessor is Xe Graphics and its successor is Battlemage; the 48EU Mobile's predecessor is HD Graphics-M with no successor recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS FP32, which is 2.22 times the 1,382.4 GFLOPS of the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile.

Q: Does the integrated 48EU Mobile support ray tracing?

A: No. The database lists zero ray tracing cores for the 48EU Mobile, while the A310E has 6 RT cores.

Q: What are the memory configurations of these two GPUs?

A: The A310E has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 48EU Mobile uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The A310E has a 2000 MHz boost clock, while the 48EU Mobile boosts to 1800 MHz. The A310E also has a much higher base clock of 2000 MHz versus 300 MHz.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The A310E has a 75 W TDP and requires a 250 W suggested power supply. The 48EU Mobile has a 28 W TDP and is an integrated part with no power supply recommendation.

Q: Which GPU is newer?

A: The 48EU Mobile was released on 2023-12-13, while the A310E was released on 2024-03-31. However, the A310E is marked as end-of-life while the 48EU Mobile is active.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

No direct benchmark scores exist in the database for either GPU, as both have empty benchmark arrays and zero average scores. However, the recorded specifications allow for direct computation of theoretical performance ratios. The A310E's FP32 throughput of 3.072 TFLOPS is exactly 2.22 times the 48EU Mobile's 1,382.4 GFLOPS. This ratio carries through to pixel fill rate, where 32.00 GPixel/s divided by 14.40 GPixel/s equals 2.22. The texture fill rate advantage is smaller but still significant: 64.00 GTexel/s versus 43.20 GTexel/s gives a 1.48x lead for the A310E. The shading unit count also doubles: 768 versus 384. The ROP count doubles as well, 16 versus 8. The TMU count is 32 versus 24, a 1.33x advantage. The A310E's memory bandwidth of 124.0 GB/s cannot be directly compared to the 48EU Mobile's system dependent figure, but the dedicated GDDR6 memory with 1937 MHz effective 15.5 Gbps speed ensures consistent bandwidth, whereas the integrated part depends on whatever system memory is installed. The A310E also sustains its 2000 MHz clock at both base and boost, while the 48EU Mobile has a 300 MHz base clock that must ramp up to 1800 MHz under load, a 6x clock ramp. This suggests the integrated GPU may spend more time at lower clocks during power-constrained operation.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The A310E uses the DG2-128 chip with Xe-HPG architecture, while the 48EU Mobile uses the Meteor Lake chip with Xe-LPG architecture. The process node is 6 nm at TSMC for the A310E versus 10 nm at Intel for the 48EU Mobile. Transistor count is 7,200 million for the A310E, with no figure recorded for the 48EU Mobile. Die size is 157 mm² for the A310E, with none recorded for the integrated part. Transistor density is 45.9M per mm² for the A310E only. Base clock is 2000 MHz versus 300 MHz. Boost clock is 2000 MHz versus 1800 MHz. Memory clock is 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) for the A310E versus system shared for the 48EU Mobile. Memory size is 4 GB GDDR6 versus system shared. Memory bus width is 64 bit versus system shared. Memory bandwidth is 124.0 GB/s versus system dependent. Shading units are 768 versus 384. TMUs are 32 versus 24. ROPs are 16 versus 8. RT cores are 6 versus none. Pixel rate is 32.00 GPixel/s versus 14.40 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 64.00 GTexel/s versus 43.20 GTexel/s. FP32 is 3.072 TFLOPS versus 1,382.4 GFLOPS. FP16 is 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 2.765 TFLOPS (2:1). TDP is 75 W versus 28 W. Slot width is single-slot versus IGP. Power connectors are none versus not recorded. Suggested PSU is 250 W versus not recorded. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus Ring Bus. Display outputs are 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 versus portable device dependent. DirectX support is 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1). Both share OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The A310E has dimensions of 168 mm length, 69 mm height, and 20 mm width, while the 48EU Mobile has no recorded dimensions. Production status is end-of-life versus active. Release dates differ by about three months, with the 48EU Mobile released 2023-12-13 and the A310E released 2024-03-31. Predecessors are Xe Graphics versus HD Graphics-M, and the A310E has a successor in Battlemage while the 48EU Mobile has none recorded.