Intel Arc G3 vs Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the Intel Arc G3 and the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU. The database lists no shared tests, no delta percentages, and no win counts for either part in this pairing. However, the available data for the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU provides a reference point: its single recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 733, placing it in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs. The Intel Arc G3 has no benchmark scores recorded, so its percentile of 50 is derived from other database entries rather than direct measurements.

For the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU, the nearest rivals in the database are all integrated or low-end discrete parts. It matches the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU exactly, with both showing an average score of 733 and a delta of 0%. Against the AMD Radeon HD 6470M, the 64EU leads by 1.4%, as that AMD part scores 723. Against the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M, the 64EU trails by 2.4%, since the NVIDIA part scores 751. These deltas are small, indicating that in this performance class, the 64EU sits in a narrow band where a few percentage points separate it from its closest database neighbors.

The Intel Arc G3, by contrast, has no nearest rivals listed and no benchmark entries. The database therefore cannot establish a measured performance relationship between the two Intel parts. What can be compared directly are the specification-level throughput figures, which are recorded for both. The G3 delivers a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s. The 64EU delivers 30.40 GPixel/s and 60.80 GTexel/s. In these terms, the G3 is 57.9% ahead in pixel rate and 57.9% ahead in texture rate, using the 64EU as the baseline. These are computed from the recorded figures, not from benchmark runs.

FP32 compute follows the same pattern. The G3 records 6.144 TFLOPS, while the 64EU records 1.946 TFLOPS. That puts the G3 at roughly 3.16 times the FP32 throughput of the 64EU. FP16 figures also show a large gap: 12.29 TFLOPS for the G3 versus 3.891 TFLOPS for the 64EU, again a ratio of about 3.16. These numbers come directly from the specification fields and represent theoretical peak rates, not application-level results.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc G3 wins on every recorded throughput metric. Its shading unit count of 1280 is 2.5 times the 512 shading units on the 64EU. Its 40 texture mapping units compare to 32 on the 64EU, a 25% advantage. Its 20 raster output pipelines compare to 16 on the 64EU, a 25% advantage. It also includes 10 ray tracing cores, while the 64EU has no recorded ray tracing cores at all. The G3 boost clock is 2400 MHz versus 1900 MHz for the 64EU, a 26.3% higher peak clock. Each of these factors contributes to the G3's higher theoretical fill rates and compute throughput.

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU wins in efficiency-related specifications, though not in raw performance. Its TDP is 65 W, which is higher than the G3's 25 W, so it does not win on power draw. It does have a documented transistor count of 17,800 million on a 243 mm² die with a transistor density of 73.3M / mm². The G3 lists its transistor count and die size as unknown. The 64EU also has a recorded predecessor, HD Graphics, while the G3 has no predecessor or successor listed. The 64EU has an actual benchmark score in the database, which is more than the G3 can claim. For practical use-case analysis, the G3 is positioned for workloads that need higher geometry throughput, pixel fill, and ray tracing support. The 64EU is positioned for systems where the integrated GPU is paired with a desktop Arrow Lake-S chip and where the display output is motherboard dependent.

In terms of percentile placement, the G3 sits at the 50th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the 64EU sits at the 3rd percentile. That percentile gap is consistent with the large difference in recorded compute specifications. It also suggests that the G3, despite having no direct benchmark entries, is treated by the database as a mid-pack performer, whereas the 64EU is near the bottom of the recorded distribution.

Architecture Differences

The two parts come from different Intel architectures and different chip platforms. The Intel Arc G3 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture, is built on the Panther Lake chip, and belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU uses the Xe-LPG architecture, is built on the Arrow Lake-S chip, and belongs to the Arc Graphics (Arrow Lake) generation. The architectural generation gap matters: Xe3-LPG is a newer design than Xe-LPG, and the G3's higher shading unit count and inclusion of ray tracing cores reflect that generational step.

The process node is listed as 3 nm for both parts. However, the foundry differs. The G3 is fabricated by Intel, while the 64EU is fabricated by TSMC. The 64EU has full die details recorded: 17,800 million transistors, a die size of 243 mm², and a transistor density of 73.3M / mm². The G3's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown, so no density figure can be computed for it.

Memory configuration is identical in structure. Both use System Shared memory, with a System Shared bus width and System Dependent bandwidth. Neither part has dedicated VRAM. Clock behavior differs: both have a 300 MHz base clock, but the G3 boosts to 2400 MHz while the 64EU boosts to 1900 MHz. The G3 has 10 ray tracing cores; the 64EU has none recorded. The G3 also has more texture mapping units (40 versus 32) and more raster output pipelines (20 versus 16).

API support is the same for both: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both are integrated parts (IGP slot width), and the G3 has no power connectors while the 64EU lists none as well. The bus interface differs: the G3 uses IGP, while the 64EU uses Ring Bus. Display outputs also differ: the G3 is Portable Device Dependent, while the 64EU is Motherboard Dependent. This reflects their target platforms: the G3 is aimed at mobile or portable devices, while the 64EU is a desktop integrated solution.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Intel Arc G3 has 1280 shading units, while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has 512.

Q: Does the Intel Arc G3 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the G3 has 10 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has no ray tracing cores recorded.

Q: What is the boost clock difference between the two?

A: The Intel Arc G3 boosts to 2400 MHz. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU boosts to 1900 MHz.

Q: How does the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It matches the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and 24EU with a 0% delta, leads the AMD Radeon HD 6470M by 1.4%, and trails the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M by 2.4%.

Q: Are both GPUs integrated?

A: Yes, both have an IGP slot width and use System Shared memory.

Q: What is the FP32 throughput of each part?

A: The Intel Arc G3 records 6.144 TFLOPS. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU records 1.946 TFLOPS.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Arc G3 dominates the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU in every recorded specification that affects throughput: shading units, texture units, raster output pipelines, ray tracing cores, boost clock, pixel rate, texture rate, FP32, and FP16. The G3's 25 W TDP is also lower than the 64EU's 65 W, which reinforces the G3's positioning as the more capable part despite being built for portable devices.

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU does have one advantage in the database: it has a recorded benchmark score of 733 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, and it has a documented die with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² TSMC process. The G3 has no benchmark entry and no die details. For users who rely on measured benchmark data, the 64EU at least has a concrete data point. But that data point places it at the 3rd percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are all within a few percentage points, including parts like the AMD Radeon HD 6470M and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M.

The G3, with a 50th percentile placement and no direct measurements, cannot be validated by benchmark runs in this database. However, its specification sheet alone puts it far beyond the 64EU in raw capability. The pixel rate advantage of 48.00 GPixel/s versus 30.40 GPixel/s and the FP32 advantage of 6.144 TFLOPS versus 1.946 TFLOPS are large enough that no reasonable benchmark result would close the gap. The G3 is the part to choose for higher graphical workload potential. The 64EU is the part with actual recorded measurements, but those measurements confirm it sits at the low end of the database distribution.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two parts:

• Architecture: Xe3-LPG (G3) versus Xe-LPG (64EU)
• Chip: Panther Lake (G3) versus Arrow Lake-S (64EU)
• Generation: Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) (G3) versus Arc Graphics (Arrow Lake) (64EU)
• Foundry: Intel (G3) versus TSMC (64EU)
• Transistors: unknown (G3) versus 17,800 million (64EU)
• Die Size: unknown (G3) versus 243 mm² (64EU)
• Transistor Density: not recorded (G3) versus 73.3M / mm² (64EU)
• Boost Clock: 2400 MHz (G3) versus 1900 MHz (64EU)
• Shading Units: 1280 (G3) versus 512 (64EU)
• TMUs: 40 (G3) versus 32 (64EU)
• ROPs: 20 (G3) versus 16 (64EU)
• Ray Tracing Cores: 10 (G3) versus none recorded (64EU)
• Pixel Rate: 48.00 GPixel/s (G3) versus 30.40 GPixel/s (64EU)
• Texture Rate: 96.00 GTexel/s (G3) versus 60.80 GTexel/s (64EU)
• FP32: 6.144 TFLOPS (G3) versus 1.946 TFLOPS (64EU)
• FP16: 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) (G3) versus 3.891 TFLOPS (2:1) (64EU)
• TDP: 25 W (G3) versus 65 W (64EU)
• Bus Interface: IGP (G3) versus Ring Bus (64EU)
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent (G3) versus Motherboard Dependent (64EU)
• Release Date: 2026-05-31 (G3) versus 2024-10-23 (64EU)
• Predecessor: none recorded (G3) versus HD Graphics (64EU)
• Percentile vs All GPUs: 50 (G3) versus 3 (64EU)
• Avg Benchmark Score: 0 (G3) versus 733 (64EU)
• Benchmark Entries: none (G3) versus 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (64EU)
• Nearest Rivals: none listed (G3) versus four entries (64EU)