Intel Arc G3 Extreme vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc G3 Extreme and NVIDIA N1 20SM occupy different corners of the mobile graphics landscape, and the recorded data shows a clear split in their intended workloads.

The Intel Arc G3 Extreme is built around Panther Lake silicon using the Xe3-LPG architecture on a 3 nm process. Its design targets conventional graphics rendering and API compatibility. It reports support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it a straightforward option for applications that rely on standard graphics APIs. The GPU has 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 24 raster output units, and 12 ray tracing cores. Its peak rates are 60.00 GPixel/s for pixels and 120.0 GTexel/s for textures, with FP32 compute at 7.680 TFLOPS and FP16 at 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). This is a part that delivers balanced rasterization and ray tracing capability in a compact IGP package.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM, by contrast, is a Blackwell 2.0 design (chip GB20B) fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 382 mm². It carries 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 24 ROPs, 20 RT cores, and 80 tensor cores. Its compute throughput is notably higher: 12.01 TFLOPS FP32 and 12.01 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). Texture rate reaches 375.4 GTexel/s, while pixel rate is 56.30 GPixel/s. The N1 20SM also brings 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. However, the database lists its API support as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. That means its strengths lie outside conventional gaming and graphics workloads, likely in compute or AI-oriented tasks given the large memory pool and tensor core count.

In terms of raw shading throughput, the NVIDIA part leads by a wide margin. The 12.01 TFLOPS FP32 figure is roughly 56% higher than the Intel part's 7.680 TFLOPS. Texture fillrate is similarly dominant, with 375.4 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s, a 3.1x advantage. The Intel GPU does hold a slight lead in pixel fillrate, 60.00 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s, but that gap is under 7%. Clock speeds also differ: the Intel part boosts to 2500 MHz from a 300 MHz base, while the NVIDIA part boosts to 2346 MHz from 741 MHz base.

The memory situation is not comparable. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, which means its performance scales with the host platform's RAM. The NVIDIA N1 20SM has dedicated 128 GB of LPDDR5X at 273.2 GB/s, which removes a major bottleneck for memory-intensive workloads. This alone shifts the use-case balance heavily toward the NVIDIA part for tasks that stream large datasets.

The verdict from the data: the Intel Arc G3 Extreme wins where standard graphics API compatibility and ray tracing in a low-power IGP matter. The NVIDIA N1 20SM wins where raw compute throughput, texture throughput, and dedicated memory capacity dominate.

The Verdict

Choosing between these two parts comes down to what the host device must do.

For a portable device that runs DirectX-based games or Vulkan applications, the Intel Arc G3 Extreme is the functional choice. It is the only one of the two with graphics API support listed in the database. DirectX 12 Ultimate support means it can handle modern rendering features, and the 12 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced effects. Its 80 W TDP and IGP slot width indicate it is designed to live inside a processor package, not as a discrete add-in card. The 300 MHz base clock and 2500 MHz boost clock show a wide dynamic range, which suits bursty gaming loads.

For a device that prioritizes compute throughput, massive memory capacity, or AI-style tensor workloads, the NVIDIA N1 20SM is the clear pick. The 80 tensor cores are unique to this part in this comparison. The 128 GB memory pool is enormous for an IGP, and the 273.2 GB/s bandwidth is far beyond what system-shared memory typically provides. The 2560 shading units and 160 TMUs give it a decisive edge in any shader-heavy or texture-heavy workload. The lack of DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support in the database, however, means it should not be selected for conventional PC gaming.

The data shows no ambiguity: pick Intel for graphics API compatibility and ray tracing in a low-power envelope. Pick NVIDIA for raw compute, tensor operations, and memory capacity. Neither part is a generalist replacement for the other.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct benchmark scores for either part, and no head-to-head benchmark entries exist. Both parts hold a 50th percentile position among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 0. This means the comparison must be made from the recorded specification data rather than measured application performance.

The most decisive specification differential is in shading throughput. The NVIDIA N1 20SM delivers 12.01 TFLOPS FP32, which is 4.33 TFLOPS higher than the Intel Arc G3 Extreme's 7.680 TFLOPS. In percentage terms, that is a 56.4% advantage for the NVIDIA part. The FP16 comparison is even more lopsided in NVIDIA's favor if the workload uses FP16 without the 2:1 rate: NVIDIA matches 12.01 TFLOPS, while Intel's 15.36 TFLOPS only applies when using the 2:1 ratio. Under 1:1 FP16 conditions, the Intel part would drop to roughly half its listed FP16 rate, but the database only records the 2:1 figure.

Texture throughput is a second major win for NVIDIA. The N1 20SM posts 375.4 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s for the Intel part, a 3.13x difference. This is driven by the NVIDIA part's 160 TMUs compared to 48 on the Intel GPU, combined with a higher boost clock. Pixel rate is the one metric where Intel leads: 60.00 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s, a 6.6% edge, despite having fewer ROPs (24 on both parts, but Intel achieves a higher pixel rate due to its higher boost clock).

Memory bandwidth is not directly comparable because the Intel part uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA part's dedicated 273.2 GB/s is a hard number, and it is paired with 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus. For any workload that reads or writes large memory blocks, the NVIDIA part has a structural advantage that no system-shared design can match.

Clock behavior also differs. Intel's base clock is 300 MHz with a 2500 MHz boost, a 8.33x ratio. NVIDIA's base is 741 MHz with a 2346 MHz boost, a 3.17x ratio. This suggests the Intel part is designed to idle very low and ramp high, while the NVIDIA part stays closer to its operating range. The NVIDIA part's memory clock is fixed at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective data rate.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM. It delivers 12.01 TFLOPS FP32, compared to 7.680 TFLOPS for the Intel Arc G3 Extreme, a 56.4% advantage.

Q: Can the NVIDIA N1 20SM run DirectX games?

A: The database lists its DirectX support as N/A. It also lists OpenGL and Vulkan as N/A. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. For standard graphics APIs, only the Intel part has recorded support.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth and no dedicated memory pool.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM has 20 RT cores. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme has 12 RT cores. However, the Intel part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which includes ray tracing APIs, while the NVIDIA part has no DirectX support listed.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The Intel Arc G3 Extreme uses a 3 nm process at Intel. The NVIDIA N1 20SM uses a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 382 mm².

Q: Which GPU has more texture mapping units?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM has 160 TMUs. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme has 48 TMUs. This drives a large texture fillrate difference: 375.4 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures with different design goals.

Intel's Arc G3 Extreme uses the Xe3-LPG architecture, part of the Arc Graphics-M generation for Panther Lake. It is fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel. The architecture is designed for integrated graphics within a processor package, evidenced by its IGP slot width, no power connectors, and 80 W TDP. It supports the full modern graphics API stack: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The shading array consists of 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 12 RT cores. The FP16 rate of 15.36 TFLOPS is achieved at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, which is a common approach for consumer graphics parts that want to accelerate half-precision shader work without doubling the hardware.

NVIDIA's N1 20SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture on the GB20B chip, part of the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 382 mm². This is a larger, more complex die than a typical IGP. The architecture includes 80 tensor cores, which are absent from the Intel part. The FP16 rate is 12.01 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, meaning there is no dedicated FP16 acceleration path; FP32 and FP16 throughput are identical. The memory subsystem is a dedicated 128 GB LPDDR5X pool on a 256-bit bus, which is a server-class or AI-workstation-class memory configuration. The API support is listed as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, which strongly implies this part is not intended for conventional graphics rendering but for compute or AI inference workloads where those APIs are not used.

The ray tracing implementations also differ. Intel uses 12 dedicated RT cores within a graphics-oriented architecture. NVIDIA uses 20 RT cores within a compute-oriented architecture. The presence of RT cores in the NVIDIA part does not imply DirectX ray tracing support, given the N/A API listing, so its RT cores are likely used for other acceleration tasks.

Specification Differences

The following specification fields differ between the Intel Arc G3 Extreme and the NVIDIA N1 20SM.

Process node: Intel uses 3 nm. NVIDIA uses 5 nm.

Foundry: Intel fabricates its own chip. NVIDIA uses TSMC.

Die size: Intel is unknown. NVIDIA is 382 mm².

Base clock: Intel is 300 MHz. NVIDIA is 741 MHz.

Boost clock: Intel is 2500 MHz. NVIDIA is 2346 MHz.

Memory clock: Intel is system shared. NVIDIA is 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective.

Memory size: Intel is system shared. NVIDIA is 128 GB.

Memory type: Intel is system shared. NVIDIA is LPDDR5X.

Memory bus width: Intel is system shared. NVIDIA is 256 bit.

Memory bandwidth: Intel is system dependent. NVIDIA is 273.2 GB/s.

Shading units: Intel has 1536. NVIDIA has 2560.

Texture mapping units: Intel has 48. NVIDIA has 160.

Raster output units: Intel has 24. NVIDIA has 24 (same).

Ray tracing cores: Intel has 12. NVIDIA has 20.

Tensor cores: Intel has none listed. NVIDIA has 80.

Pixel rate: Intel is 60.00 GPixel/s. NVIDIA is 56.30 GPixel/s.

Texture rate: Intel is 120.0 GTexel/s. NVIDIA is 375.4 GTexel/s.

FP32 throughput: Intel is 7.680 TFLOPS. NVIDIA is 12.01 TFLOPS.

FP16 throughput: Intel is 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1). NVIDIA is 12.01 TFLOPS (1:1).

TDP: Intel is 80 W. NVIDIA is unknown.

Bus interface: Intel is IGP. NVIDIA is PCIe 5.0 x16.

Display outputs: Intel is portable device dependent. NVIDIA is 1x HDMI.

API support: Intel supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. NVIDIA lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Release date: Both are listed as 2026-05-31.

Production status: Both are listed as Active.

The two parts share the same ROP count and the same release date, but nearly every other measurable specification points in opposite directions. The Intel part is a graphics-first IGP with modest compute and a low power envelope. The NVIDIA part is a compute-first IGP with massive memory, high shading throughput, and tensor acceleration, but no conventional graphics API support in the database.