AMD Radeon RX 7400 vs Intel Arc G3 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 7400 and the Intel Arc G3 occupy very different positions in the graphics hardware spectrum. The RX 7400 is a discrete, dual-slot add-in card built on AMD’s RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the Arc G3 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) from Intel’s Xe3-LPG family. The recorded data shows a clear performance gap, but the Arc G3 still delivers competitive feature support in a power-efficient, space-saving design. This analysis covers the architecture, benchmark results, specifications, and practical use cases for both parts based strictly on the database measurements.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the AMD Radeon RX 7400?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7400 has an average benchmark score of 2467, placing it in the 17th percentile of all GPUs in the database.

Q: How does the Radeon RX 7400 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RX 7400 is 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon 8040S, 1.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 710M, 1.8% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics 610, and 1.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710M.

Q: Does the Intel Arc G3 have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No, the database shows the Intel Arc G3 has an empty benchmark list and an average benchmark score of 0, so no direct performance measurements are available for comparison.

Q: What is the thermal design power (TDP) of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7400 has a TDP of 43 W, while the Intel Arc G3 has a TDP of 25 W.

Q: What is the release date for each product?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7400 was released on 2025-08-07, and the Intel Arc G3 has a release date of 2026-05-31.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: Yes, both the AMD Radeon RX 7400 and the Intel Arc G3 support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 7400 uses the Navi 33 chip, which is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish." This chip is manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC, and the die size is 204 mm² with 13,300 million transistors. The transistor density works out to 65.2 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel Arc G3, by contrast, uses the Panther Lake chip based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, belonging to the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation. It is manufactured on a 3 nm process at Intel’s own foundry, though the database lists transistor count, die size, and transistor density as unknown.

The RX 7400 features 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 raster operations pipelines, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Arc G3 has fewer execution resources: 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs, and 10 ray tracing cores. These differences in raw hardware resources directly explain the large gap in compute throughput. The RX 7400 delivers 16.49 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 32.97 TFLOPS of FP16 performance (at a 2:1 ratio), whereas the Arc G3 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS FP16, again at a 2:1 ratio. The RX 7400 is roughly 2.7 times stronger in FP32 compute.

Both GPUs support the same modern API feature set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 7400’s pixel rate is 147.2 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 257.6 GTexel/s. The Arc G3’s pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. The RX 7400 is therefore more than three times faster in pixel throughput and about 2.7 times faster in texture throughput. These are fundamental architectural differences, not just clock speed variations.

The memory subsystems are entirely different in nature. The RX 7400 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Arc G3 uses system shared memory, with its type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. This means the Arc G3’s memory performance depends entirely on the host platform’s system memory configuration, while the RX 7400 has dedicated, fixed-bandwidth VRAM.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two GPUs, and the wins counter shows 0 for both. However, the RX 7400 has a full set of individual benchmark scores, while the Arc G3 has none recorded. This absence of data means direct score comparisons cannot be made from the database. The only quantitative performance indicator available for the RX 7400 is its average benchmark score of 2467, versus an average of 0 for the Arc G3, which reflects the missing test data rather than a measured performance result.

Looking at the RX 7400’s individual benchmark results, the highest score comes from the Passmark G3D test at 11897, followed by Passmark G2D at 1209, Passmark GPU Compute at 5152, and Passmark DirectX 9 at 176. Lower scores appear in Passmark DirectX 11 at 97, Passmark DirectX 10 at 59, and Passmark DirectX 12 at 44. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test returns a score of 1103. These figures show the RX 7400’s strongest showing in general 3D workload, while its DirectX 12 Passmark result is surprisingly low relative to its other scores. The GPU compute score of 5152 indicates moderate compute capability, which aligns with its FP32 throughput of 16.49 TFLOPS.

The RX 7400 sits at the 17th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are all within 1.9% of its average score. The AMD Radeon 8040S trails by 1.1%, the NVIDIA GeForce 710M by 1.4%, the Intel HD Graphics 610 by 1.8%, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710M by 1.9%. These margins are small, meaning the RX 7400 is positioned at the lower end of the GPU performance spectrum, competitive with older or entry-level integrated and discrete parts. For the Arc G3, the database records a 50th percentile position, but with no benchmark scores and no nearest rivals, this percentile figure cannot be corroborated by any measured performance data.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The RX 7400 is a discrete card with a dual-slot form factor and a single 6-pin power connector, requiring a suggested power supply of 200 W. The Arc G3 is an IGP with no slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU requirement. The RX 7400 uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the Arc G3 uses an IGP bus interface. Display outputs also differ: the RX 7400 provides 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1, while the Arc G3’s outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

Clock speeds show a notable contrast. The RX 7400 has a base clock of 1452 MHz, a boost clock of 2300 MHz, a game clock of 2200 MHz, and a memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The Arc G3 has a much lower base clock of 300 MHz but a slightly higher boost clock of 2400 MHz, with no game clock listed and system shared memory clock. The lower base clock on the Arc G3 suggests a power-saving design, while the higher boost clock allows it to reach competitive peak frequencies when needed.

Shader resources differ significantly. The RX 7400 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores. The Arc G3 has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs, and 10 RT cores. The RX 7400 has 40% more shading units, 180% more TMUs, 220% more ROPs, and 180% more RT cores than the Arc G3. Process node is also different: 6 nm at TSMC for the RX 7400 versus 3 nm at Intel for the Arc G3. The RX 7400’s predecessor is Navi II and its successor is Navi IV, while the Arc G3 has no recorded predecessor or successor.

Memory configuration is another major divider. The RX 7400 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc G3 uses system shared memory with no fixed size, type, bus width, or bandwidth. The RX 7400’s memory bandwidth is a fixed hardware specification, whereas the Arc G3’s memory performance is entirely dependent on the host system’s memory. TDP figures confirm the power gap: 43 W for the RX 7400 versus 25 W for the Arc G3.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 7400 wins in every measurable performance category in the database. Its 16.49 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is 2.7 times the Arc G3’s 6.144 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 147.2 GPixel/s is roughly three times the Arc G3’s 48.00 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 257.6 GTexel/s is about 2.7 times the Arc G3’s 96.00 GTexel/s. The RX 7400’s 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth gives it a fixed, predictable memory performance profile that the Arc G3 cannot match with system shared memory. The RX 7400 also has a much higher shading unit count, TMU count, ROP count, and RT core count, which translates directly to higher fill rates and compute throughput in graphics workloads.

The Intel Arc G3 wins on power efficiency and integration. Its 25 W TDP is 18 W lower than the RX 7400’s 43 W, making it a lighter load for a laptop or compact system. It requires no power connectors and no separate PSU recommendation, as it is an IGP. Its 3 nm process node is smaller than the RX 7400’s 6 nm node, which contributes to its lower power draw. The Arc G3’s boost clock of 2400 MHz is 100 MHz higher than the RX 7400’s 2300 MHz, so in short bursts at peak clocks it can reach competitive frequencies despite its lower base clock. The Arc G3 also matches the RX 7400 on API support, with both offering DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

For use cases, the RX 7400 is the choice for any workload that needs dedicated graphics memory and higher compute throughput. Its 288.0 GB/s bandwidth and 8 GB VRAM make it suitable for gaming at settings that require more than system shared memory can provide. The Arc G3 fits scenarios where physical space, power draw, and heat are the primary constraints, such as thin-and-light laptops or portable devices. Its system dependent memory means it relies on the host platform, but its low TDP and integrated form factor make it viable for basic graphics tasks and media playback.

The Verdict

The data presents a straightforward picture. The AMD Radeon RX 7400 is the stronger GPU by a wide margin in every recorded performance metric: FP32 throughput, pixel rate, texture rate, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, and RT cores. Its average benchmark score of 2467 sits in the 17th percentile, and it edges out its nearest rivals by 1.1% to 1.9%. The RX 7400 is a discrete, dual-slot card with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, and a 43 W TDP. It requires a 6-pin power connector and a 200 W suggested PSU, so it is meant for a full desktop or larger chassis.

The Intel Arc G3 has no recorded benchmark scores, which prevents any direct performance comparison from the database. Its 50th percentile rating is not supported by any measured test data. What the Arc G3 does offer is a 25 W TDP, a 3 nm process node, no power connectors, and an IGP form factor. Its 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate are the lowest in this comparison, but they come with the smallest power envelope. The 100 MHz higher boost clock does not compensate for the much lower base clock and reduced execution resources.

A user who needs a discrete GPU with dedicated memory should select the RX 7400. Its performance class is clear from the benchmark data, and its nearest rivals are all within a couple percent, so expectations should be modest. A user who needs an integrated solution with minimal power draw should consider the Arc G3, but should understand that its performance cannot be verified from the database. The RX 7400 is the only one of the two with recorded performance evidence, and that evidence places it at a lower tier of the GPU market. The Arc G3 remains an unmeasured quantity, with its 50th percentile ranking unsubstantiated by any test results.