Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER Comparison

The Verdict

The database comparison between the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is not a contest of equals. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER holds the 76th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Intel part sits at the 50th percentile. The NVIDIA card delivers 44.10 TFLOPS of FP32 compute against the Intel part's 1,280.0 GFLOPS, a 34-fold advantage. Its average benchmark score of 31,087 dwarfs the Intel iGPU's recorded average of 0, because the Intel part has no benchmark entries in the database. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is an end-of-life desktop add-in board with 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and a 285 W TDP, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile is an active integrated graphics processor with system-shared memory and a 25 W TDP. Users who need discrete-class rendering, ray tracing performance, or high-bandwidth VRAM should choose the NVIDIA card. Users who need a low-power integrated GPU for a portable device, with no separate power connector and no standalone cooler, should choose the Intel part. The data does not support any other conclusion.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturers, different foundries, and different design philosophies. Intel builds the Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry, using the Wildcat Lake chip and the Xe3-LPG architecture. NVIDIA builds the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER on a 5 nm process at TSMC, using the AD103 chip and the Ada Lovelace architecture. The Intel part belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Wildcat Lake) generation and lists HD Graphics-M as its predecessor, while the NVIDIA part belongs to the GeForce 40 series, lists GeForce 30 as its predecessor, and GeForce 50 as its successor. The Intel GPU is marked as Active in production status; the NVIDIA GPU is End-of-life.

Transistor and die data highlight the scale gap. The NVIDIA chip contains 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, with a transistor density of 121.1M per mm². The Intel part lists transistor count and die size as unknown, so no direct comparison is possible. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER uses 8,448 shading units, 264 texture mapping units, 96 ROPs, 66 ray tracing cores, and 264 tensor cores. The Intel iGPU uses 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 2 ray tracing cores, with no tensor core count listed. NVIDIA's tensor cores enable AI-accelerated workloads that the Intel part cannot match, since the Intel specification does not list any equivalent hardware.

Memory architecture differs completely. The Intel GPU uses system-shared memory with a system-shared bus width and system-dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA card uses 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus with 672.3 GB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). The Intel memory clock is listed as system shared. This bandwidth gap drives many of the benchmark differences.

Power and physical design separate the two as well. The Intel part has a 25 W TDP, is an IGP with no slot width, no power connectors, and a bus interface of IGP. The NVIDIA part has a 285 W TDP, a triple-slot cooler, a single 16-pin power connector, a suggested power supply of 600 W, and a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface. The NVIDIA card measures 310 mm in length, 140 mm in height, and 61 mm in width, while the Intel part has no listed dimensions. Display outputs also differ: the NVIDIA card provides 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Intel output is portable device dependent.

Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The API feature set is identical, but the underlying hardware capability is not.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER has ten recorded benchmark scores in the database. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has none. The head-to-head benchmark table is empty, and the win counts are 0 for both sides. This absence of Intel data means the comparison relies entirely on the NVIDIA results and the specification-level differences.

The NVIDIA card's strongest recorded result is in Geekbench OpenCL, with a score of 199,267. Its Geekbench Vulkan score is 53,683. In Passmark tests, the GPU scores 31,811 in G3D, 18,372 in GPU compute, 1,225 in G2D, 360 in DirectX 9, 278 in DirectX 11, 181 in DirectX 10, and 119 in DirectX 12. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, it scores 5,569. The average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 31,087.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context for the NVIDIA card's standing. The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 averages 31,206, which is 0.4% higher. The NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q averages 31,220, also 0.4% higher. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell averages 31,532, which is 1.4% higher. The NVIDIA TITAN RTX averages 31,676, which is 1.9% higher. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER sits just below all four of these cards in average score, with deltas ranging from -0.4% to -1.9%. The data shows a tightly clustered group at this performance tier, with the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER at the lower edge of that cluster.

Since the Intel part has no benchmark scores, the database records no wins for it and no wins for the NVIDIA card in head-to-head testing. The only quantitative comparison available is the specification sheet. The Intel part's FP32 throughput of 1,280.0 GFLOPS is 3.4% of the NVIDIA card's 44.10 TFLOPS. The Intel pixel rate of 20.00 GPixel/s is 8% of the NVIDIA card's 250.6 GPixel/s. The Intel texture rate of 40.00 GTexel/s is 5.8% of the NVIDIA card's 689.0 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA card's FP16 performance is 44.10 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part delivers 2.560 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. Every throughput metric favors the discrete card by a wide margin.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark percentile?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER sits at the 76th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile sits at the 50th percentile.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists no benchmark entries for the Intel part, and its average benchmark score is 0. The NVIDIA card has ten recorded scores with an average of 31,087.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The Intel part uses system-shared memory with a system-shared bus width and system-dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA card uses 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus with 672.3 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Intel part has a 25 W TDP, no power connectors, and no suggested power supply. The NVIDIA card has a 285 W TDP, one 16-pin power connector, and a suggested power supply of 600 W.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: Both list ray tracing hardware. The Intel part has 2 ray tracing cores, while the NVIDIA card has 66 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile is listed as Active. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is listed as End-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile wins on power efficiency and integration. Its 25 W TDP is 8.8% of the NVIDIA card's 285 W TDP. It requires no power connector, no suggested PSU, and no dedicated slot width, because it is an IGP. The bus interface is IGP, meaning it does not occupy a PCIe slot. The Intel part is built on a 3 nm process, while the NVIDIA card uses 5 nm. The Intel part is still Active in production, while the NVIDIA card is End-of-life. The Intel release date of 2026-04-15 is later than the NVIDIA release date of 2024-01-23, so the Intel part is the newer product. For a portable device where display outputs are device dependent and the system shares memory, the Intel iGPU is the only viable option between the two, because the NVIDIA card requires a triple-slot cooler, a 16-pin power connector, and a 600 W power supply.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER wins on every measurable performance metric in the database. Its FP32 throughput of 44.10 TFLOPS is 34 times the Intel part's 1,280.0 GFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 250.6 GPixel/s is 12.5 times the Intel part's 20.00 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 689.0 GTexel/s is 17.2 times the Intel part's 40.00 GTexel/s. Its FP16 output of 44.10 TFLOPS at 1:1 is 17.2 times the Intel part's 2.560 TFLOPS at 2:1. The NVIDIA card has 8,448 shading units versus 256, 264 TMUs versus 16, 96 ROPs versus 8, 66 ray tracing cores versus 2, and 264 tensor cores versus none listed. The NVIDIA card has 16 GB of dedicated GDDR6X memory with 672.3 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel part relies on system-dependent shared memory. The NVIDIA card has ten benchmark scores, an average of 31,087, and a 76th percentile ranking, while the Intel part has no scores and a 50th percentile ranking. The nearest rival analysis shows the NVIDIA card performs within 1.9% of the NVIDIA TITAN RTX, which averages 31,676, and within 1.4% of the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell, which averages 31,532. The Quadro M5000 and GRID M60-1Q both average slightly higher at 31,206 and 31,220 respectively, each 0.4% above the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER.

The use-case split is therefore sharp. The Intel part serves systems where low power, no discrete cooling, and no external power are requirements. The NVIDIA card serves desktop systems where the triple-slot footprint, 285 W TDP, and 600 W suggested PSU are acceptable, and where the 76th percentile performance class is needed.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification field. The manufacturers differ: Intel versus NVIDIA. The chips differ: Wildcat Lake versus AD103. The architectures differ: Xe3-LPG versus Ada Lovelace. The generations differ: Arc Graphics-M (Wildcat Lake) versus GeForce 40. The process nodes differ: 3 nm at Intel versus 5 nm at TSMC. The transistor counts differ: unknown versus 45,900 million. The die sizes differ: unknown versus 379 mm². The transistor densities differ: not listed versus 121.1M per mm².

Clock speeds differ. The Intel base clock is 300 MHz with a boost of 2500 MHz and system-shared memory clock. The NVIDIA base clock is 2340 MHz with a boost of 2610 MHz and a memory clock of 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). The memory fields differ entirely: system shared size, type, bus width, and bandwidth for Intel versus 16 GB, GDDR6X, 256 bit, and 672.3 GB/s for NVIDIA.

Compute unit counts differ. Shading units: 256 versus 8,448. TMUs: 16 versus 264. ROPs: 8 versus 96. Ray tracing cores: 2 versus 66. Tensor cores: not listed versus 264. Throughput rates differ: pixel rate 20.00 GPixel/s versus 250.6 GPixel/s, texture rate 40.00 GTexel/s versus 689.0 GTexel/s, FP32 1,280.0 GFLOPS versus 44.10 TFLOPS, and FP16 2.560 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 44.10 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and physical specifications differ. TDP: 25 W versus 285 W. Slot width: IGP versus triple-slot. Power connectors: none versus 1x 16-pin. Suggested PSU: not listed versus 600 W. Bus interface: IGP versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs: portable device dependent versus 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. Dimensions: not listed versus 310 mm length, 140 mm height, 61 mm width.

Production and release details differ. Production status: Active versus End-of-life. Release dates: 2026-04-15 versus 2024-01-23. Predecessors: HD Graphics-M versus GeForce 30. Successors: not listed versus GeForce 50. Launch MSRP: not listed for Intel, 799 USD for NVIDIA. The API support is identical: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 for both. The benchmark fields differ: no benchmarks and no average score for Intel versus ten benchmarks and an average score of 31,087 for NVIDIA. The percentile differs: 50 versus 76. The nearest rivals list is empty for Intel, while NVIDIA has four recorded rivals with average scores from 31,206 to 31,676 and deltas from -0.4% to -1.9%.