Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile vs Intel Arc Graphics 32EU Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core specifications of the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile uses the Wildcat Lake chip with the Xe3-LPG architecture. It has 128 shading units, 8 texture mapping units, 4 raster output units, and 1 ray tracing core. Its base clock is 300 MHz with a boost clock of 2300 MHz, and it carries a 25 W TDP.

Q: How does the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU differ in its processing unit count?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU features 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units. This is exactly double the shading units, TMUs, and ROPs of the Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile. It does not list a dedicated ray tracing core count.

Q: What are the fill rate and compute figures for the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile?

A: The Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile delivers a pixel rate of 9.200 GPixel/s, a texture rate of 18.40 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance of 588.8 GFLOPS. Its FP16 output is rated at 1,177.6 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio.

Q: What performance does the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU achieve in the recorded benchmark?

A: In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the Arc Graphics 32EU scores 733 points. This places it in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 733.

Q: Which rivals are closest to the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU in benchmark scores?

A: The nearest rivals include the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU and Intel Arc Graphics 64EU, both with an average score of 733 and a delta of 0%. The AMD Radeon HD 6470M scores 723 (1.4% slower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M scores 751 (2.4% faster).

Q: What are the architectural and platform differences between the two processors?

A: The Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile uses the Xe3-LPG architecture on the Wildcat Lake chip, fabricated by Intel on a 3 nm process. The Arc Graphics 32EU uses the Xe-LPG architecture on the Arrow Lake-S chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm process, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors.

Architecture Differences

The two integrated GPUs come from different architectural generations and chip designs. The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile is built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, part of the Wildcat Lake chip, and belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Wildcat Lake) generation. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses the older Xe-LPG architecture, found on the Arrow Lake-S chip, in the Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) generation.

Manufacturing is a notable split. The Wildcat Lake die is produced by Intel at 3 nm, while the Arrow Lake-S die is produced by TSMC at 3 nm. Both use the same process width, but the underlying foundry and chip design differ. The Arrow Lake-S die is substantial: 243 mm² with 17,800 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 73.3M per mm². The die size and transistor count for the Wildcat Lake chip are not recorded in the database.

Compute resources differ sharply. The Arc Graphics 32EU provides 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile provides 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. This gives the 32EU twice the raw shading, texturing, and pixel output resources. The 1 Xe Mobile does include 1 ray tracing core, whereas the 32EU has no ray tracing core count listed.

Clock behavior also diverges. Both parts share a 300 MHz base clock, but the boost clocks are not equal. The Wildcat Lake part reaches 2300 MHz, while the Arrow Lake-S part boosts to 1950 MHz. The higher boost on the smaller chip partially compensates for its lower unit count, but the larger 32EU still holds a substantial throughput advantage.

Memory configurations are effectively identical in structure. Both use System Shared memory, with the same System Shared type, bus width, and system-dependent bandwidth. Display outputs depend on the platform: the Wildcat Lake part lists "Portable Device Dependent," while the Arrow Lake-S part lists "Motherboard Dependent." The bus interface also differs: the 1 Xe Mobile uses an IGP interface, while the 32EU uses a Ring Bus interface.

API support is the same on both parts. Each supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Power requirements differ substantially, with the 1 Xe Mobile rated at 25 W and the 32EU rated at 65 W. The 1 Xe Mobile has no power connectors, and the 32EU does not list any.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile and the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU. The only recorded benchmark score belongs to the 32EU, which achieved 733 points in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. The 1 Xe Mobile has no benchmark entries on file.

The 32EU's score of 733 places it in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU and Intel Arc Graphics 64EU, both scoring exactly 733 with a 0% delta. That means the 32EU, 24EU, and 64EU produce identical results in this test according to the database, indicating that the benchmark may be constrained by other system factors rather than the GPU alone.

Against the AMD Radeon HD 6470M, the 32EU is 1.4% faster. The HD 6470M scores 723, a 10-point gap. Against the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M, the 32EU trails by 2.4%. The GT 415M scores 751, an 18-point gap. These deltas are small in absolute terms and place the 32EU in a narrow performance band among its closest competitors.

For the 1 Xe Mobile, the lack of benchmark scores means no direct comparison is possible from the recorded data. However, the theoretical throughput figures give an indication of its relative position. The 1 Xe Mobile delivers 588.8 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, a texture rate of 18.40 GTexel/s, and a pixel rate of 9.200 GPixel/s. The 32EU delivers 998.4 GFLOPS of FP32, 31.20 GTexel/s, and 15.60 GPixel/s.

These figures show the 32EU at roughly 1.7 times the FP32 throughput, 1.7 times the texture rate, and 1.7 times the pixel rate of the 1 Xe Mobile. The 32EU's lower boost clock of 1950 MHz versus 2300 MHz does not close the gap created by double the execution units. The 1 Xe Mobile's FP16 rate of 1,177.6 GFLOPS is also lower than the 32EU's 1.997 TFLOPS.

The power envelopes tell a different story. The 1 Xe Mobile operates at 25 W, while the 32EU operates at 65 W. This means the 32EU consumes 2.6 times the power of the 1 Xe Mobile to deliver roughly 1.7 times the compute throughput. In efficiency terms, the 1 Xe Mobile delivers 23.55 GFLOPS per watt, while the 32EU delivers 15.36 GFLOPS per watt, based on the recorded TDP and FP32 figures.

The Wildcat Lake part also has a newer architecture generation, Xe3-LPG versus Xe-LPG, which may bring architectural efficiency improvements that are not captured by the limited benchmark data. The ray tracing core on the 1 Xe Mobile is a feature absent from the 32EU's listed specifications, though no ray tracing benchmarks are available to quantify its impact.

Specification Differences

The two integrated GPUs differ across several recorded specification fields. The chip identity is different: Wildcat Lake for the 1 Xe Mobile, Arrow Lake-S for the 32EU. The architecture differs as well, with Xe3-LPG on the former and Xe-LPG on the latter. The generation labels also differ: Arc Graphics-M (Wildcat Lake) versus Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake).

The foundry and die details diverge. The 1 Xe Mobile is fabricated by Intel, while the 32EU is fabricated by TSMC. The 32EU has a recorded die size of 243 mm² and a transistor count of 17,800 million, with a density of 73.3M per mm². The 1 Xe Mobile has no transistor count, die size, or density data recorded.

Clock speeds differ in boost frequency only. Both list a 300 MHz base clock. The 1 Xe Mobile boosts to 2300 MHz, while the 32EU boosts to 1950 MHz. Memory specifications are identical: System Shared size, type, bus width, and system-dependent bandwidth for both.

Execution unit counts differ significantly. The 1 Xe Mobile has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. The 32EU has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The 1 Xe Mobile includes 1 ray tracing core; the 32EU has no ray tracing core count listed.

Throughput rates differ. The 1 Xe Mobile achieves 9.200 GPixel/s and 18.40 GTexel/s, while the 32EU achieves 15.60 GPixel/s and 31.20 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 588.8 GFLOPS for the 1 Xe Mobile and 998.4 GFLOPS for the 32EU. FP16 figures are 1,177.6 GFLOPS and 1.997 TFLOPS, respectively.

Power and interface fields differ. The 1 Xe Mobile has a 25 W TDP, while the 32EU has a 65 W TDP. The 1 Xe Mobile lists "None" for power connectors; the 32EU has no power connector data. The bus interface is IGP for the 1 Xe Mobile and Ring Bus for the 32EU. Display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent" for the 1 Xe Mobile and "Motherboard Dependent" for the 32EU.

Release dates differ. The 1 Xe Mobile has a release date of 2026-04-15, while the 32EU has a release date of 2024-10-23. Both share the same predecessor, HD Graphics-M, and neither has a recorded successor. Neither part has a launch MSRP in the database.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear separation between these two integrated graphics processors. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU offers the higher raw performance in every measurable throughput category. Its FP32 output of 998.4 GFLOPS is 69.6% higher than the 1 Xe Mobile's 588.8 GFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 15.60 GPixel/s is 69.6% higher than 9.200 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 31.20 GTexel/s is 69.6% higher than 18.40 GTexel/s. The 32EU is the faster part on paper.

The 32EU also has the only recorded benchmark result in the database. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 733 places it in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs, with nearest rivals within a 2.4% band. This is a low ranking overall, indicating that both parts belong to the entry-level segment of integrated graphics. The lack of a recorded benchmark for the 1 Xe Mobile means its real-world standing cannot be confirmed from the database.

The 1 Xe Mobile counters with better efficiency and portability characteristics. Its 25 W TDP is less than half of the 32EU's 65 W TDP. Based on the recorded FP32 and TDP figures, the 1 Xe Mobile delivers higher compute per watt. Its newer Xe3-LPG architecture, ray tracing core, and higher boost clock of 2300 MHz suggest architectural refinement, but these advantages do not translate into higher throughput in the recorded specifications.

The platform context matters. The 1 Xe Mobile is designed for portable devices, as indicated by its "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs and IGP bus interface. The 32EU is designed for desktop motherboards, with "Motherboard Dependent" outputs and a Ring Bus interface. Users with a portable platform and strict power limits would favor the 1 Xe Mobile. Users with a desktop platform and available power headroom would favor the 32EU for its higher compute and fill rates.

The database shows no direct head-to-head benchmark comparison, so the verdict rests on specification analysis. The 32EU is the stronger performer in absolute terms, with roughly 1.7 times the FP32, texture, and pixel throughput of the 1 Xe Mobile. The 1 Xe Mobile is the more efficient part, delivering competitive throughput at a much lower power draw. The choice between them depends on the target platform: the 1 Xe Mobile suits power-constrained portable designs, while the 32EU suits desktop systems where the 65 W TDP is acceptable.