Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile vs NVIDIA H20 NVL16 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct benchmark scores for either the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile or the NVIDIA H20 NVL16, and the head-to-head benchmark field is empty. Both units sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of zero for each. This means no empirical performance comparison can be drawn from measured results. The wins counter stands at zero for both parts, so the database does not currently attribute a single victory to either product. Without benchmark entries, the only quantitative analysis available comes from the specification sheets and architectural data. The Intel part operates as an integrated graphics processor with a 65 W TDP, while the NVIDIA part is a server accelerator rated at 400 W. The disparity in power envelopes alone suggests a vast performance gap, but the absence of measured scores prevents any concrete statement of margin. The data shows that the H20 NVL16 carries 9984 shading units, 312 tensor cores, and 312 texture mapping units, while the Arc part has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. These figures indicate a theoretical compute advantage for the NVIDIA part, but the database does not record how that translates into actual workload performance. The FP32 throughput of the H20 NVL16 is 39.54 TFLOPS, versus 3.942 TFLOPS for the Arc part, a tenfold difference in raw single-precision math. FP16 rates follow a similar pattern, with 79.07 TFLOPS on the NVIDIA side and 7.885 TFLOPS on the Intel side. Pixel rates are close, 47.52 GPixel/s for NVIDIA and 52.80 GPixel/s for Intel, which suggests the integrated part actually leads in rasterization throughput at the pixel level. Texture rates diverge sharply, with the H20 NVL16 delivering 617.8 GTexel/s against 123.2 GTexel/s for the Arc. These are theoretical maxima, not benchmark results, so they serve as upper-bound estimates rather than proven performance.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses the Meteor Lake chip and the Xe-LPG architecture, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process. It belongs to the Arc Graphics-M generation, and the database lists its production status as active, with a release date of 2023-12-13. The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 uses the GH100 chip and the Hopper architecture, built on TSMC's 5 nm process, and belongs to the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation. Its release date is 2025-09-01, and its predecessor is listed as Server Ada, with Server Blackwell as the successor. The process node difference is significant: 10 nm for Intel versus 5 nm for NVIDIA, which affects transistor density and power efficiency. The NVIDIA part contains 80,000 million transistors on a 814 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 98.3M per mm². The Intel part does not have transistor count, die size, or density figures recorded in the database, so no direct comparison is possible for those metrics. Memory architecture separates the two products fundamentally. The Arc part uses system shared memory, with a system shared bus width and system dependent bandwidth, meaning it relies on the host platform's DRAM. The H20 NVL16 has 96 GB of HBM3 memory on a 6144 bit bus, delivering 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth. The memory clocks also differ, with the NVIDIA part running at 1313 MHz and 5.3 Gbps effective. The Intel part's memory clock is not listed as a fixed value, only "System Shared." Shading unit counts show a 11.1x difference in favor of NVIDIA, and the tensor core count is exclusive to the NVIDIA part at 312, since the Intel part lists no tensor cores. The Intel part does not list ray tracing cores either, while the NVIDIA part also omits RT core counts, so that comparison is unavailable. The bus interface differs as well: the Arc part uses a Ring Bus and is classified as an IGP, meaning it is integrated into the host processor, while the H20 NVL16 uses PCIe 5.0 x16 and is an SXM Module, a dedicated accelerator card. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the Intel part, whereas the NVIDIA part has no display outputs, confirming its server orientation. The API support also splits the two: the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the NVIDIA part reports N/A for all three graphics APIs, which aligns with its compute-focused role in servers. The power connector field is empty for both, but the NVIDIA part lists a suggested PSU of 800 W, while the Intel part has none, consistent with its integrated nature.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the theoretical specifications, the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 wins in raw compute, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, and texture processing. Its FP32 throughput of 39.54 TFLOPS is ten times higher than the Intel part's 3.942 TFLOPS, and its FP16 rate of 79.07 TFLOPS dwarfs the Intel part's 7.885 TFLOPS. The 96 GB HBM3 pool with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth is a massive advantage for large-scale data workloads, particularly those that require holding substantial models or datasets in memory. The 312 tensor cores give the NVIDIA part a dedicated path for matrix operations, which is typical for AI inference and training tasks. The 617.8 GTexel/s texture rate is five times the Intel part's 123.2 GTexel/s, favoring workloads that stress texture sampling, such as scientific visualization or complex rendering pipelines. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile wins in pixel throughput, with 52.80 GPixel/s versus 47.52 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA part. That small margin suggests the integrated part has a slight edge in fill-rate-bound scenarios, which could apply to certain 2D compositing or light 3D workloads. The Intel part also supports DirectX 12, OpenGL, and Vulkan APIs, which makes it functional for client-side graphics applications, while the NVIDIA part has no graphics API support in the database. The Intel part's power draw is 65 W, which is dramatically lower than the NVIDIA part's 400 W, so in power-constrained or mobile environments, the Arc part presents a viable option for graphics output. The NVIDIA part has no display outputs, so it cannot drive a monitor, making the Intel part the only choice for visual output in portable devices, as indicated by its "Portable Device Dependent" display field. The Intel part's boost clock of 2200 MHz exceeds the NVIDIA part's boost of 1980 MHz, but clock speed alone does not determine performance given the massive difference in core counts. The database does not record any benchmark wins for either part, so these conclusions derive solely from the specification tables. For workloads that fit within the Intel part's capabilities, such as basic graphics acceleration or media playback on a laptop, the Arc part is functionally appropriate. For high-throughput parallel compute, the NVIDIA part is the clear choice from the data, given its memory and compute advantages.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 is designed for a completely different performance class than the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile. The NVIDIA part delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 79.07 TFLOPS of FP16 compute, 96 GB of HBM3 memory, and 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth, all within a 400 W envelope and an SXM Module form factor. The Intel part offers 3.942 TFLOPS of FP32, 7.885 TFLOPS of FP16, system shared memory, and a 65 W TDP in an IGP form factor. A user or system builder selecting between these two parts would be choosing between an integrated graphics solution for a portable device and a server accelerator for data center workloads. The Intel part supports DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it suitable for client operating systems and applications that require a display output. The NVIDIA part has no display outputs and no graphics API support, so it is not intended for direct visual output. The Intel part's pixel rate of 52.80 GPixel/s exceeds the NVIDIA part's 47.52 GPixel/s, which is a narrow win for the integrated part in pixel fill scenarios. The NVIDIA part's texture rate of 617.8 GTexel/s is five times higher, and its tensor cores provide specialized hardware that the Intel part lacks entirely. The transistor count of 80,000 million and die size of 814 mm² for the NVIDIA part reflect a high-complexity chip, while the Intel part's transistor details are not recorded. The release dates show the Intel part launched on 2023-12-13, and the NVIDIA part on 2025-09-01, so the NVIDIA part is a newer product by nearly two years. The NVIDIA part's production status is active, and its successor is listed as Server Blackwell, indicating a planned future generation. The Intel part's predecessor is HD Graphics-M, and it has no successor listed. The database places both parts at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, but this is based on zero average benchmark scores, so it reflects a neutral position rather than a measured performance level. The suggested PSU for the NVIDIA part is 800 W, which implies a system-level power requirement far beyond the Intel part's needs. The bus interface difference, PCIe 5.0 x16 versus Ring Bus, further separates the two in terms of host integration. The NVIDIA part's memory clock of 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective is a fixed specification, whereas the Intel part's memory performance is system dependent, meaning its bandwidth varies with the host platform. The choice between these parts is dictated by the target platform: a mobile device with integrated graphics needs the Intel part, while a server node with high-bandwidth memory and massive compute demands needs the NVIDIA part. No benchmark data exists to suggest any crossover in performance, and the architectural differences reinforce the separation.

FAQ

Q: What is the process node for each part?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses Intel's 10 nm process, while the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 uses TSMC's 5 nm process.

Q: How much memory does the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 have?

A: The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 has 96 GB of HBM3 memory with a 6144 bit bus and 4.03 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile support DirectX?

A: Yes, the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the NVIDIA part reports N/A for all three APIs.

Q: What is the TDP of each product?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has a TDP of 65 W, and the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 has a TDP of 400 W.

Q: Which part has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 has 9984 shading units, while the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has 896 shading units.

Q: What is the FP32 throughput for each?

A: The Intel part delivers 3.942 TFLOPS of FP32, and the NVIDIA part delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32.