Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile vs NVIDIA Rubin GPU Comparison

Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile and NVIDIA Rubin GPU occupy opposite ends of the hardware spectrum. The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark runs between these two parts, so the comparison rests entirely on their declared specifications, computed throughput values, and platform roles. The Intel part is an integrated graphics solution for mobile processors, while the NVIDIA part is a server-grade accelerator module. The data shows a gap in raw compute, memory bandwidth, and power envelope that is difficult to overstate, yet each component is designed for a completely different environment.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either device. The average benchmark score for both entries is zero, and no nearest rivals are listed for either part. The percentile versus all GPUs is identical at 50 for both, which reflects the absence of measured data rather than any equivalence in capability. Consequently, the head-to-head comparison must be derived from the recorded peak throughput figures, memory subsystem parameters, and rendering rates.

The most significant divergence appears in floating-point performance. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile delivers a peak FP32 throughput of 3.942 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU reaches 130.0 TFLOPS FP32. That is a factor of roughly 33 in raw single-precision compute. The FP16 numbers follow the same pattern: the Intel part provides 7.885 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the NVIDIA part provides 260.0 TFLOPS with the same 2:1 ratio. The NVIDIA component offers more than 30 times the half-precision throughput of the Intel integrated graphics.

Texture throughput shows a similar skew. The Intel part records a texture rate of 123.2 GTexel/s from its 56 texture mapping units. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU records a texture rate of 2,031.2 GTexel/s from its 896 texture mapping units. That is roughly 16.5 times the texel throughput. Pixel rate is the closest computed metric between the two. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile posts 52.80 GPixel/s with 24 ROPs, while the NVIDIA Rubin GPU posts 54.41 GPixel/s with the same 24 ROPs. The difference is under 3 percent, which indicates that pixel fill rate is not where the two devices diverge meaningfully.

Memory bandwidth presents another chasm. The Intel part uses system-shared memory with a bus width and type listed as system shared, and its bandwidth is described as system dependent. No fixed figure is available for the Intel side. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU uses 288 GB of HBM4 memory on a 16384-bit bus, delivering 22.1 TB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock for the NVIDIA part is 2695 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective data rate. The Intel part has no comparable fixed memory specification because it relies on whatever system memory is present in the host laptop.

Clock speeds are closer than the compute figures might suggest. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has a base clock of 700 MHz and a boost clock of 2267 MHz. The boost clocks are within 67 MHz of each other, with the NVIDIA part slightly ahead. The base clocks differ by 400 MHz, favoring the NVIDIA part, but the integrated Intel solution has a lower thermal budget and a different operating context.

Power consumption is the defining operational difference. The Intel part carries a TDP of 65 W and is an integrated graphics processor, meaning it draws from the host platform. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU carries a TDP of 2300 W and requires a suggested power supply of 2700 W. The NVIDIA component consumes more than 35 times the power of the Intel component. That power differential aligns with the compute differential, but it also places the NVIDIA part firmly in server infrastructure, not mobile computing.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a straightforward conclusion: these two devices are not competitors. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile is an integrated GPU for Meteor Lake mobile processors, built on Intel's 10 nm process, and designed to provide graphics output for portable devices. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU is a server accelerator, built on a 3 nm TSMC process, with a 1456 mm² die and 336,000 million transistors, designed for high-throughput compute workloads in data center environments.

A user with a laptop that contains the Intel part gets a functional integrated GPU with DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, plus display output that is portable device dependent. The NVIDIA part exposes no display outputs at all, and its API support is listed as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, which indicates a compute-first role rather than a graphics output role.

The data indicates that the NVIDIA Rubin GPU is the stronger device by every compute metric except pixel rate, where it is only marginally ahead. The Intel part is the only one of the two that can drive a display in a mobile context. The power envelope of 65 W versus 2300 W makes the platform choice obvious: the Intel part belongs in a thin client or notebook, the NVIDIA part belongs in a rack-mounted server with a 2700 W power supply recommendation.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA Rubin GPU records 130.0 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile records 3.942 TFLOPS FP32. The NVIDIA part is roughly 33 times higher in single-precision throughput.

Q: How much memory does each GPU use?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has 288 GB of HBM4 memory with a 16384-bit bus and 22.1 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has a TDP of 65 W. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has a TDP of 2300 W and a suggested power supply of 2700 W.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: No. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating no graphics API support in the recorded data.

Q: What are the pixel rates for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile records 52.80 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU records 54.41 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA part is only about 3 percent higher.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has 28,672 shading units. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has 896 shading units. The NVIDIA part has 32 times more shading units.

Specification Differences

The two entries differ in nearly every recorded specification field. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile is manufactured by Intel using a 10 nm process, while the NVIDIA Rubin GPU is manufactured by TSMC using a 3 nm process. The Intel chip is Meteor Lake with the Xe-LPG architecture. The NVIDIA chip is GR100 with the Rubin architecture.

The Intel part has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs. The NVIDIA part has 28,672 shading units, 896 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs. The NVIDIA part also includes 896 tensor cores, while the Intel part records no tensor core count. Neither part lists RT cores in the database.

Memory specifications are entirely different. The Intel part uses system-shared memory with no fixed size, type, or bus width. The NVIDIA part uses 288 GB of HBM4 memory on a 16384-bit bus with 22.1 TB/s bandwidth. The memory clock for the NVIDIA part is 2695 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective data rate. The Intel memory clock is listed as system shared.

Clock speeds differ modestly. The Intel part has a 300 MHz base clock and a 2200 MHz boost clock. The NVIDIA part has a 700 MHz base clock and a 2267 MHz boost clock. The boost clocks are close, but the base clock difference is 400 MHz in favor of the NVIDIA part.

Power and form factor diverge sharply. The Intel part has a TDP of 65 W and an IGP slot width. The NVIDIA part has a TDP of 2300 W and an SXM Module slot width. The suggested power supply for the NVIDIA part is 2700 W; the Intel part records no suggested PSU. The bus interface is Ring Bus for the Intel part and PCIe 6.0 x16 for the NVIDIA part.

Display outputs also differ. The Intel part lists portable device dependent outputs, meaning it can drive the laptop panel and external displays depending on the host system. The NVIDIA part lists no outputs.

Release dates are recorded for both. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile was released on 2023-12-13. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU is dated 2025-12-31. The Intel part lists HD Graphics-M as its predecessor. The NVIDIA part lists Server Blackwell as its predecessor.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses the Xe-LPG architecture, which is part of the Meteor Lake chip generation. The process node is 10 nm from Intel's own foundry. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU uses the Rubin architecture on the GR100 chip, fabricated on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Intel part belongs to the Arc Graphics-M generation for Meteor Lake. The NVIDIA part belongs to the Server Rubin (Rxx) generation.

The NVIDIA part records a transistor count of 336,000 million on a die size of 1456 mm², with a transistor density of 230.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel part records no transistor count, die size, or transistor density in the database. The NVIDIA part is a massive monolithic die for server deployment. The Intel part is an integrated GPU sharing the package with a mobile processor.

Compute resources differ structurally. The Intel part has 896 shading units and 56 TMUs. The NVIDIA part has 28,672 shading units and 896 TMUs. Both have 24 ROPs. The NVIDIA part has 896 tensor cores, which are absent from the Intel record. The Intel part has no listed RT cores and no listed tensor cores. The NVIDIA part also has no listed RT cores.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The Intel part shares system memory with the host CPU, with bandwidth dependent on the platform. The NVIDIA part has dedicated HBM4 memory with a 16384-bit interface and a fixed 22.1 TB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA memory clock is 2695 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective. The Intel memory clock is system shared.

The NVIDIA part exposes no graphics API support in the database, with DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all listed as N/A. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This reflects the NVIDIA part as a compute accelerator without a display or graphics pipeline in the recorded data.

The power architecture also separates the two. The Intel part runs at 65 W and is an IGP. The NVIDIA part runs at 2300 W and is an SXM module requiring a 2700 W power supply. The production status for both is listed as Active. The Intel part has no launch MSRP recorded, and the NVIDIA part also has no launch MSRP recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile wins in platform flexibility for mobile systems. It is an integrated GPU with a 65 W TDP, which means it can operate inside a laptop without a separate power supply. It provides display outputs that are portable device dependent, allowing it to drive the built-in panel of a notebook. It supports a full graphics API stack with DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which is necessary for consumer operating systems and games. Its pixel rate of 52.80 GPixel/s is nearly identical to the NVIDIA part, which means for pixel fill operations the gap is small.

The Intel part also wins on power efficiency relative to its role. The 65 W TDP is a fraction of the 2300 W TDP of the NVIDIA part, and it requires no suggested PSU. The Ring Bus interface reflects its integration into the host processor package. For a portable device, the Intel part is the only viable option between the two, since the NVIDIA part has no display outputs and cannot fit into a mobile form factor.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU wins on every raw compute metric that matters for server workloads. Its FP32 throughput of 130.0 TFLOPS is roughly 33 times the Intel part. Its FP16 throughput of 260.0 TFLOPS is more than 30 times the Intel part. Its texture rate of 2,031.2 GTexel/s is about 16.5 times the Intel part. Its 288 GB of HBM4 memory with 22.1 TB/s bandwidth provides a memory subsystem that the Intel part cannot match, since the Intel part depends on system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

The NVIDIA part also wins on memory capacity and bandwidth for large data sets. The 288 GB HBM4 pool and 16384-bit bus are designed for models and datasets far beyond what a mobile integrated GPU can address. The 896 tensor cores give the NVIDIA part a dedicated matrix compute path that the Intel part lacks entirely. The 3 nm TSMC process and 336,000 million transistor count indicate a device built for maximum throughput per server slot.

The NVIDIA part wins on base clock and boost clock, with 700 MHz base versus 300 MHz base, and 2267 MHz boost versus 2200 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part also wins on shading units, texture mapping units, and transistor density. The pixel rate is essentially a tie, with the NVIDIA part ahead by 1.61 GPixel/s.

For a user choosing between these two parts, the decision is dictated by the platform. A mobile device with an Intel Meteor Lake processor requires the integrated Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile. A server environment with a 2700 W power supply and PCIe 6.0 x16 connectivity can accommodate the NVIDIA Rubin GPU. The data does not support any scenario where both devices are viable alternatives for the same task. The Intel part provides graphics output and low power draw. The NVIDIA part provides massive compute throughput and memory bandwidth with no display capability. Each wins in its own domain, and the recorded specifications show no overlap in their intended usage.