Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile vs Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark scores for the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile and the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile. Both entries have an average benchmark score of 0 and zero benchmark samples in their respective fields. Without measured frame rates, render times, or composite scores, a direct numerical comparison of performance is not possible from the recorded data.

The absence of benchmark data does not reflect the absence of capability. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile carries a peak FP32 throughput of 3.942 TFLOPS, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile delivers 1,280.0 GFLOPS (1.280 TFLOPS) of FP32 compute. The 112EU part therefore holds a theoretical compute advantage of roughly 3.08 times over the 2 Xe part. Pixel throughput tells a similar story: the 112EU Mobile reaches 52.80 GPixel/s, which is 2.64 times the 20.00 GPixel/s of the 2 Xe Mobile. Texture fill rates separate the two further, with the 112EU Mobile producing 123.2 GTexel/s against 40.00 GTexel/s for the 2 Xe Mobile, a 3.08 times difference.

These figures are theoretical peak rates drawn from the specification data, not measured application results. They indicate how much raw work each graphics engine can push per second under ideal conditions. The 112EU Mobile also boosts its clock from a 300 MHz base to 2200 MHz, whereas the 2 Xe Mobile boosts from the same 300 MHz base to 2500 MHz. A higher boost clock on the smaller part does not close the gap in absolute throughput, because the 112EU part has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units, versus 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs on the 2 Xe part.

The 112EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the 2 Xe Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The 2 Xe Mobile also lists 2 ray tracing cores, a feature absent from the 112EU Mobile specification. In API capability, the 2 Xe Mobile is the more feature-complete part. In raw throughput, the 112EU Mobile is clearly ahead.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile wins decisively in every raw throughput category present in the database. Its FP32 compute of 3.942 TFLOPS exceeds the 1,280.0 GFLOPS of the 2 Xe Mobile by a factor of 3.08. Its texture rate of 123.2 GTexel/s is similarly 3.08 times that of the 2 Xe Mobile. The pixel rate advantage is 2.64 times, and the shading unit count is 3.5 times higher (896 versus 256). For applications that are limited by shading, texturing, or rasterization throughput, the 112EU Mobile is the stronger choice.

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile wins in architectural features and power efficiency. It uses a 3 nm process node, while the 112EU Mobile uses a 10 nm node. The 2 Xe Mobile has a TDP of 25 W, compared to 65 W for the 112EU Mobile. That means the 2 Xe Mobile delivers its compute within 38.5 percent of the power envelope of the larger part. The 2 Xe Mobile also reaches a boost clock of 2500 MHz, 300 MHz higher than the 2200 MHz of the 112EU Mobile. Higher clock speed on a smaller process suggests better per-watt efficiency in frequency-sensitive workloads.

The 2 Xe Mobile additionally carries DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support and 2 ray tracing cores. The 112EU Mobile only lists DirectX 12 (12_1) with no ray tracing cores. Titles that require DirectX 12 Ultimate features, such as mesh shaders, variable rate shading, or hardware ray tracing, will only run their full feature set on the 2 Xe Mobile. The 112EU Mobile cannot offer those capabilities regardless of its raw speed.

Both parts share system-shared memory, system-dependent bandwidth, and portable-device-dependent display outputs. Neither part has a dedicated memory bus width or memory type in the database. For workloads that depend on memory bandwidth, the system memory configuration will dominate, and neither integrated part has a fixed bandwidth advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two parts come from different chip designs and different process nodes. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses the Meteor Lake chip with the Xe-LPG architecture on an Intel 10 nm process. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile uses the Wildcat Lake chip with the Xe3-LPG architecture on an Intel 3 nm process. The 112EU part is from the Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) generation, while the 2 Xe part is from the Arc Graphics-M (Wildcat Lake) generation. Both share the HD Graphics-M as their predecessor, and both list no successor in the database.

The execution resources differ substantially. The 112EU Mobile has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units. The 2 Xe Mobile has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units. The 112EU Mobile has 3.5 times the shading units, 3.5 times the TMUs, and 3 times the ROPs of the 2 Xe Mobile. The 2 Xe Mobile compensates with 2 ray tracing cores, a feature not listed on the 112EU Mobile.

Clock behavior differs in the boost range. Both parts have a 300 MHz base clock. The 112EU Mobile boosts to 2200 MHz, and the 2 Xe Mobile boosts to 2500 MHz. The 2 Xe Mobile therefore has a 13.6 percent higher boost clock. The smaller part also operates at a much lower TDP: 25 W versus 65 W. The 2 Xe Mobile lists no power connectors, which is consistent with an integrated processor, while the 112EU Mobile lists no power connector data at all.

The bus interface also differs. The 112EU Mobile uses a Ring Bus, while the 2 Xe Mobile uses an IGP bus interface. Both parts are IGP slot width and both use system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. Neither part lists dedicated memory capacity, type, or bus width. The 112EU Mobile was released on 2023-12-13, and the 2 Xe Mobile was released on 2026-04-15. The production status for both is Active.

Compute precision rates also differ in a notable way. The 112EU Mobile lists FP16 throughput of 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) and FP32 of 3.942 TFLOPS. The 2 Xe Mobile lists FP16 of 2.560 TFLOPS (2:1) and FP32 of 1,280.0 GFLOPS. The 2:1 ratio indicates both parts use a packed FP16 path that doubles throughput relative to FP32. The 112EU Mobile has exactly twice its FP32 rate in FP16, and the 2 Xe Mobile also has exactly twice its FP32 rate in FP16. The 112EU Mobile's FP16 rate is 3.08 times that of the 2 Xe Mobile, matching the FP32 ratio.

Both parts support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX support is the only API gap: 12 (12_1) for the 112EU Mobile versus 12 Ultimate (12_2) for the 2 Xe Mobile. The 2 Xe Mobile also supports hardware ray tracing through its 2 RT cores, which the 112EU Mobile does not.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has an FP32 rate of 3.942 TFLOPS, which is 3.08 times the 1,280.0 GFLOPS of the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it lists 2 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile lists no ray tracing cores and only DirectX 12 (12_1).

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

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has a TDP of 65 W. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has a TDP of 25 W. The 2 Xe Mobile uses less than half the power of the 112EU Mobile.

Q: Why does the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile boost higher despite having fewer shading units?

A: The 2 Xe Mobile boosts to 2500 MHz from a 300 MHz base, while the 112EU Mobile boosts to 2200 MHz. The 2 Xe Mobile is built on a 3 nm process versus a 10 nm process for the 112EU Mobile, which allows a higher clock within a 25 W TDP.

Q: Do both GPUs use dedicated video memory?

A: No. Both use system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. Neither lists dedicated memory size, type, or bus width.

Q: Which GPU has higher pixel and texture fill rates?

A: The 112EU Mobile has a pixel rate of 52.80 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 123.2 GTexel/s. The 2 Xe Mobile has 20.00 GPixel/s and 40.00 GTexel/s. The 112EU Mobile leads by 2.64 times in pixel rate and 3.08 times in texture rate.

The Verdict

The data separates these two integrated GPUs along clear lines. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile is the throughput leader. It delivers 3.942 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 123.2 GTexel/s of texture fill, and 52.80 GPixel/s of pixel fill. It has 896 shading units and a 65 W TDP. For any workload that stresses raw shading, texturing, or rasterization, the 112EU Mobile is the stronger part. Its 3.08 times compute advantage over the 2 Xe Mobile is the largest single gap in the specification set.

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile is the efficiency and feature leader. Its 25 W TDP is less than half that of the 112EU Mobile, and its 3 nm process node is two generations ahead in node size. It boosts 300 MHz higher, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), and includes 2 ray tracing cores. The 112EU Mobile cannot run DirectX 12 Ultimate features or hardware ray tracing. The 2 Xe Mobile also achieves its lower power envelope while remaining an active production part with a 2026 release date.

The decision between the two depends on the workload. A system that needs maximum integrated graphics throughput for high-resolution display output, complex shader effects, or texture-heavy applications should use the 112EU Mobile. A system that prioritizes low power draw, a smaller process footprint, and modern API features including ray tracing should use the 2 Xe Mobile. The 112EU Mobile will deliver more raw frames per second in most conventional graphics workloads, while the 2 Xe Mobile will deliver a more feature-complete API experience at a fraction of the power cost. Both parts are active, both are integrated, both use system-shared memory, and both are rated at the 50th percentile against all GPUs in the database. The percentile rating indicates neither part is positioned at the extremes of the overall GPU distribution. The recorded data does not include measured benchmarks, so the verdict rests on the theoretical throughput, power, and feature specifications listed above.