Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile vs Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile Comparison

Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile and Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile are both integrated graphics solutions from Intel, but they serve different segments of the mobile market. The data in the database shows two designs with distinct architectural generations, process nodes, and performance ceilings. The Arc part targets a more capable integrated experience, while the 24EU part is built for efficiency and basic display duties. No direct head-to-head benchmark scores are recorded for these two parts, so the comparison relies on their recorded specifications, compute rates, and architectural traits.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not contain a direct benchmark match between the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile and the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile. However, the recorded compute throughput figures provide a clear quantitative basis for comparison. The Arc part delivers 588.8 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the 24EU part delivers 384.0 GFLOPS. This gives the Arc part a 53.3% higher FP32 throughput. In FP16, the Arc part reaches 1,177.6 GFLOPS (2:1), compared to 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1) for the 24EU part, a similar 53.3% advantage.

Pixel throughput also favors the Arc part. The Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile records a pixel rate of 9.200 GPixel/s, while the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile records 4.000 GPixel/s. That is a 130% advantage for the Arc part. Texture rate follows the same pattern: the Arc part achieves 18.40 GTexel/s, versus 12.00 GTexel/s for the 24EU part, a 53.3% lead.

The shading unit count is the one specification where the 24EU part appears numerically larger. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has 192 shading units, while the Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile has 128 shading units. However, the boost clock difference reverses the effective compute output. The Arc part boosts to 2300 MHz, while the 24EU part boosts to 1000 MHz. The combination of a 130% higher boost clock and a different architectural generation results in the Arc part producing higher absolute throughput despite fewer shading units. The 24EU part also has more texture mapping units (12 versus 8) and the same number of raster output units (4 each), but its lower clock and older architecture cap its realized performance.

The Arc part includes 1 ray tracing core, while the 24EU part records none. This is a structural difference that no clock or unit count can compensate for in workloads that use ray tracing. The Arc part also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the 24EU part supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both parts list OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The API feature set difference means the Arc part can run titles requiring DirectX 12 Ultimate features, while the 24EU part is limited to the earlier DirectX 12 feature level.

Neither part has an average benchmark score recorded in the database, and both share a percentile versus all GPUs of 50. With no benchmark entries, the percentile field is neutral and does not indicate a performance ranking. The recorded wins in the head-to-head section are zero for both parts, which reflects the absence of direct benchmark data rather than a competitive outcome.

The Verdict

The data indicates the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile is the stronger integrated graphics solution for compute and graphics workloads. Its FP32 throughput is 53.3% higher than the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile, its pixel rate is 130% higher, and its texture rate is 53.3% higher. It also adds ray tracing support and DirectX 12 Ultimate, which the 24EU part lacks. The Arc part uses a newer architecture, Xe3-LPG, on a 3 nm process, compared to the 24EU part's Xe-LP architecture on a 10 nm process. The Arc part boosts to 2300 MHz, over twice the 1000 MHz boost of the 24EU part.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile, however, has a clear efficiency profile. Its TDP is recorded at 6 W, versus 25 W for the Arc part. This is more than a 4x difference in power allocation. The 24EU part uses a ring bus interface, while the Arc part uses an IGP bus interface. The 24EU part also has more shading units (192 versus 128) and more texture mapping units (12 versus 8), though these do not translate into higher throughput due to the lower clock and older architecture.

The verdict from the recorded data is straightforward. The Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile is the choice for systems where integrated graphics performance matters, such as lightweight content creation, casual gaming, or any workload that can use DirectX 12 Ultimate or ray tracing. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is the choice for ultra-low-power, fanless designs where the 6 W TDP is the primary constraint and basic display output is the main task. The 25 W TDP of the Arc part requires more cooling and power delivery, which limits its deployment to larger or more capable mobile chassis.

Neither part has a launch MSRP recorded in the database, so no price comparison is possible. The production status for both is listed as Active, with release dates of April 2026 for the Arc part and December 2024 for the 24EU part. The Arc part lists a predecessor named HD Graphics-M, while the 24EU part has no predecessor recorded.

Architecture Differences

The two parts come from different Intel graphics generations. The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile uses the Xe3-LPG architecture, belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Wildcat Lake) generation, and is built on a 3 nm process at Intel's foundry. The chip is named Wildcat Lake. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses the Xe-LP architecture, belongs to the HD Graphics-T (Twin Lake) generation, and is built on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. The chip is named Twin Lake.

The process node difference is significant: 3 nm versus 10 nm. This directly affects transistor density and power efficiency, though the database does not record transistor counts or die sizes for either part. The base clock is the same at 300 MHz for both. The boost clock differs sharply: 2300 MHz for the Arc part versus 1000 MHz for the 24EU part.

The shading unit count is 128 for the Arc part and 192 for the 24EU part. The texture mapping unit count is 8 versus 12. The raster output unit count is 4 for both. The Arc part includes 1 ray tracing core, while the 24EU part has none. The database records no tensor cores for either part.

Memory configuration is identical in type: both use System Shared memory, with System Shared bus width and System Dependent bandwidth. Neither part has dedicated video memory. The bus interface differs: the Arc part uses IGP, while the 24EU part uses Ring Bus. Display outputs are listed as Portable Device Dependent for both.

API support differs at the DirectX level. The Arc part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the 24EU part supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The Arc part draws 25 W TDP, while the 24EU part draws 6 W TDP. The Arc part uses no power connectors and has an IGP slot width. The 24EU part has no power connector record and also an IGP slot width.

The release timeline places the 24EU part in December 2024 and the Arc part in April 2026. The Arc part lists HD Graphics-M as its predecessor, while the 24EU part has no predecessor. Both parts are currently marked as Active in production.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile records 588.8 GFLOPS FP32, which is 53.3% higher than the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile's 384.0 GFLOPS.

Q: Does the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile support ray tracing?

A: No. The database records no ray tracing cores for the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile. The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile has 1 ray tracing core.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two parts?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile has a TDP of 25 W, while the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has a TDP of 6 W.

Q: Which part has more shading units?

A: The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has 192 shading units, while the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile has 128 shading units. Despite this, the Arc part has higher FP32 throughput due to its higher boost clock and newer architecture.

Q: What DirectX versions do they support?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What process nodes are used?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile is built on a 3 nm process. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is built on a 10 nm process. Both are fabricated by Intel.

Q: What are the boost clocks?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile boosts to 2300 MHz. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile boosts to 1000 MHz. Both have a base clock of 300 MHz.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile wins in all recorded compute and throughput metrics. Its FP32 rate is 588.8 GFLOPS, its pixel rate is 9.200 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 18.40 GTexel/s. It also wins on feature support: 1 ray tracing core and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) put it ahead of the 24EU part for modern graphics APIs. The 2300 MHz boost clock allows it to extract more performance from its 128 shading units than the 24EU part can from 192 shading units at 1000 MHz. The 3 nm process node suggests better transistor efficiency per clock, though the database does not record density numbers. For any workload that relies on shader compute, pixel fill, or texture sampling, the Arc part is the clear leader.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile wins strictly on power and unit count. Its 6 W TDP is a fraction of the Arc part's 25 W, making it suitable for ultra-portable, fanless devices where thermal and power budgets are tight. It has 192 shading units and 12 texture mapping units, which are higher counts than the Arc part's 128 and 8, respectively. However, these higher counts do not produce higher throughput because the boost clock is 130% lower and the architecture is a generation older. The 24EU part also uses a Ring Bus interface, which may integrate differently into low-power system-on-chip designs, while the Arc part uses an IGP interface.

For use-case selection, the data points to a clear split. Devices that need integrated graphics for more than basic display output, such as light photo editing, casual 3D applications, or older games, will benefit from the Arc part's higher compute rates and DirectX 12 Ultimate support. Devices that prioritize battery life, low heat, and minimal power draw, such as thin-and-light notebooks or embedded systems, will favor the 24EU part. The Arc part's 25 W TDP requires a cooling solution and a power delivery path that the 6 W 24EU part does not need.

The pixel rate difference is the largest gap in the recorded data. The Arc part delivers 9.200 GPixel/s, which is 130% higher than the 24EU part's 4.000 GPixel/s. This affects fill-rate-bound scenarios, such as high-resolution UI compositing or simple 2D rendering. The texture rate gap is smaller but still significant: 18.40 GTexel/s versus 12.00 GTexel/s, a 53.3% lead for the Arc part. Both parts share the same 4 raster output units, so the pixel rate difference comes entirely from the clock speed and architecture.

The API support difference matters for software compatibility. DirectX 12 Ultimate includes features like ray tracing, mesh shaders, and variable rate shading, which DirectX 12 (12_1) does not guarantee. Games or applications that require DirectX 12 Ultimate will run on the Arc part but may fail or fall back on the 24EU part. The Arc part's ray tracing core is the only hardware acceleration for ray tracing in this comparison.

Both parts use System Shared memory, so performance will scale with the host system's memory bandwidth, which the database records as System Dependent. Neither part has a dedicated memory bus width or bandwidth figure. This means real-world performance for both parts is partly dependent on the surrounding platform, a factor that the recorded data cannot quantify.

The release dates show the 24EU part came first in December 2024, while the Arc part arrived in April 2026. Both are active products. The Arc part has a predecessor, HD Graphics-M, while the 24EU part does not. This suggests the 24EU part may be a first-generation product in its line, while the Arc part is a successor to an earlier integrated graphics family.

In summary, the Intel Arc Graphics 1 Xe Mobile is the performance-oriented integrated GPU in this comparison, with higher compute, pixel, and texture rates, plus modern API and ray tracing support. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is the efficiency-oriented part, with a 6 W TDP and higher unit counts that do not translate into higher throughput. The choice between them depends on whether the platform can afford 25 W for graphics or needs to stay at 6 W.