Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for this comparison is one-sided. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile has benchmark results across nine different tests, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. This means the head-to-head comparison is entirely defined by the RTX 4080 Mobile's absolute performance and its position relative to other GPUs.

The RTX 4080 Mobile delivers 24.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. Its strongest showing comes in Geekbench OpenCL, where it scores 159,575 points. The Vulkan score is 145,807, indicating the Ada Lovelace architecture handles the cross-platform graphics API with only a modest reduction from the OpenCL result. In the Passmark suite, the G3D score is 24,926, which is the primary gaming-oriented metric. The GPU compute score is 11,191, roughly 45% of the G3D result, suggesting compute workloads are not the card's primary strength relative to its graphics output.

The older DirectX API results show an interesting pattern. Passmark DirectX 9 scores 286, DirectX 11 scores 244, and DirectX 10 scores 157. DirectX 12 drops to 96. This is a peculiar distribution, where the legacy DirectX 9 path actually outperforms the modern DirectX 12 path in this particular test. The 2D score of 929 is comparatively strong, which is typical for a discrete mobile GPU with dedicated memory bandwidth.

The average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 38,135. This places the card at the 81st percentile of all GPUs in the database. The nearest rivals in the database are tightly clustered. The NVIDIA GeForce MX570 has an average score of 38,299, which is 0.4% lower than the RTX 4080 Mobile. The RTX 5080 Mobile scores 38,349, 0.6% lower. On the other side, the RTX 4070 scores 37,648, which is 1.3% higher than the RTX 4080 Mobile, and the Tesla P4 also scores 37,628, again 1.3% higher. This clustering is notable: the RTX 4080 Mobile sits within a narrow band of roughly 2% across four very different GPUs. The data suggests that in this database's scoring methodology, the RTX 4080 Mobile is effectively performance-equivalent to an RTX 4070 desktop card, despite the large specification differences between them.

Because the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has no benchmark entries, the database cannot provide any direct comparison of scores between these two parts. The wins column shows zero for the Intel part, and the RTX 4080 Mobile wins all categories by default, but that is a function of missing data rather than measured superiority in every workload.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile uses the Wildcat Lake chip with the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process. It belongs to the Arc Graphics-M generation. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile uses the AD104 chip with the Ada Lovelace architecture, built on TSMC's 5 nm process. NVIDIA's part has 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 121.8 million per square millimeter. The Intel chip's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database.

The compute resources are wildly different. The RTX 4080 Mobile has 7,424 shading units, 232 texture mapping units, and 80 ROPs. It also carries 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores. The Intel part has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, with only 2 RT cores and no tensor cores listed. This is a 29x difference in shading units, a 14.5x difference in TMUs, and a 10x difference in ROPs. The RT core count differs by 29x as well. The Intel part is clearly designed for minimal power draw and integrated duties, while the RTX 4080 Mobile is a full discrete solution.

Clock behavior is also distinct. The Intel GPU has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2,500 MHz. The NVIDIA part has a base clock of 1,290 MHz and a boost of 1,665 MHz. The Intel part's boost clock is substantially higher, but it has far fewer execution units to feed. The NVIDIA card compensates with sheer width. Memory clocks are not directly comparable: the Intel GPU uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the RTX 4080 Mobile runs its GDDR6 at 2,250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed.

The FP16 and FP32 ratios differ. The Intel part delivers 2.560 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 2:1 ratio against its 1,280.0 GFLOPS of FP32. The RTX 4080 Mobile delivers 24.72 TFLOPS for both FP16 and FP32 at a 1:1 ratio. This means the NVIDIA card does not gain any throughput advantage from reduced precision, while the Intel part doubles its rate when using FP16. For AI or compute workloads that can tolerate FP16, the Intel part's relative uplift is larger, but the absolute numbers remain far below the NVIDIA card.

Process node and foundry also differ. Intel uses its own 3 nm process. NVIDIA uses TSMC's 5 nm. The Intel part is newer, with a release date in April 2026, while the RTX 4080 Mobile launched in January 2023. Both are listed as Active in production status. The NVIDIA part has a clear predecessor and successor in the database, the GeForce 30 Mobile and GeForce 50 Mobile respectively. The Intel part's predecessor is HD Graphics-M, with no successor listed.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4080 Mobile wins every category where data exists. In raw compute, its 24.72 TFLOPS of FP32 is roughly 19.3x the Intel part's 1,280.0 GFLOPS. Pixel throughput is 133.2 GPixel/s versus 20.00 GPixel/s, a 6.7x difference. Texture rate is 386.3 GTexel/s versus 40.00 GTexel/s, a 9.7x difference. The NVIDIA card has 58 RT cores versus 2, and 232 tensor cores versus none, so ray tracing and tensor-accelerated workloads are effectively exclusive to the NVIDIA part.

The Intel part does have some structural advantages that are not measured in benchmarks. Its TDP is 25 W, compared to 110 W for the RTX 4080 Mobile. That is a 4.4x difference in power draw. For thin-and-light laptops or fanless designs, the Intel part is the only viable option between these two. The RTX 4080 Mobile requires the thermal and power headroom of a large gaming laptop. The Intel part also uses system shared memory, which means the system designer can allocate RAM as needed, while the RTX 4080 Mobile has a fixed 12 GB GDDR6 pool with 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

The NVIDIA card's memory bandwidth is a decisive advantage for texture-heavy workloads, high resolutions, and large datasets. The Intel part's system-dependent bandwidth cannot compete with dedicated GDDR6, especially when the system RAM is shared with the CPU. The RTX 4080 Mobile's 192-bit bus width and 12 GB capacity are substantial for mobile gaming, while the Intel part's memory configuration is entirely dependent on the host system.

For legacy API compatibility, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. There is no difference in API support. The RTX 4080 Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x16 as its bus interface, while the Intel part is an IGP with no separate bus interface listed. The NVIDIA card has no power connectors listed, which is typical for mobile parts where power comes from the motherboard, and the Intel part also has no power connectors. Both are listed with slot width IGP, meaning neither is a standalone expansion card.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every measurable specification. The process node is 3 nm for Intel versus 5 nm for NVIDIA. The foundry is Intel versus TSMC. Transistor count is unknown for Intel versus 35,800 million for NVIDIA. Die size is unknown for Intel versus 294 mm². The Intel GPU has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The NVIDIA GPU has 7,424 shading units, 232 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. RT cores are 2 versus 58. Tensor cores are none versus 232.

Base clock is 300 MHz versus 1,290 MHz. Boost clock is 2,500 MHz versus 1,665 MHz. Memory size is system shared versus 12 GB. Memory type is system shared versus GDDR6. Bus width is system shared versus 192 bit. Bandwidth is system dependent versus 432.0 GB/s. Pixel rate is 20.00 GPixel/s versus 133.2 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 40.00 GTexel/s versus 386.3 GTexel/s. FP32 is 1,280.0 GFLOPS versus 24.72 TFLOPS. FP16 is 2.560 TFLOPS at 2:1 versus 24.72 TFLOPS at 1:1. TDP is 25 W versus 110 W. Bus interface is IGP versus PCIe 4.0 x16.

Release date is April 2026 for the Intel part versus January 2023 for the NVIDIA part. The Intel part's predecessor is HD Graphics-M, while the NVIDIA part's predecessor is GeForce 30 Mobile. The NVIDIA part has a listed successor, GeForce 50 Mobile; the Intel part has none. Neither part has a launch MSRP listed in the database, so no pricing information can be stated.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile than the RTX 4080 Mobile in benchmarks?

A: The database contains no benchmark scores for the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile. The RTX 4080 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 38,135, so no direct comparison is possible from the recorded data.

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

A: Yes, it has 2 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The RTX 4080 Mobile has 58 RT cores.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The Intel part uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The RTX 4080 Mobile has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 Mobile compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: Its average score of 38,135 is 0.4% higher than the GeForce MX570, 0.6% higher than the RTX 5080 Mobile, 1.3% lower than the RTX 4070, and 1.3% lower than the Tesla P4.

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile boosts to 2,500 MHz, while the RTX 4080 Mobile boosts to 1,665 MHz. The Intel part has a lower base clock of 300 MHz versus 1,290 MHz.

Q: What power draw does each GPU require?

A: The Intel part is rated at 25 W TDP. The RTX 4080 Mobile is rated at 110 W TDP.

The Verdict

The data shows a complete performance gap between these two parts. The RTX 4080 Mobile is the only one with recorded benchmark scores, and those scores place it at the 81st percentile of all GPUs. Its 24.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 432.0 GB/s of dedicated memory bandwidth, and 58 RT cores make it a high-end mobile GPU for gaming and GPU-accelerated workloads. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has no recorded scores, 256 shading units, 2 RT cores, and a 25 W TDP. It is an integrated-class part designed for power efficiency.

The RTX 4080 Mobile is the clear choice for anyone who needs maximum graphics performance in a laptop. The Intel part is the choice for systems where power draw is the limiting factor, since its 25 W TDP is a fraction of the NVIDIA card's 110 W. The RTX 4080 Mobile also benefits from tensor cores, which the Intel part lacks entirely. For AI inference, DLSS-style upscaling, or any tensor-accelerated workload, the NVIDIA card is the only option between these two.

The Intel part's higher boost clock does not compensate for the massive difference in execution resources. A 2,500 MHz boost across 256 shaders cannot match a 1,665 MHz boost across 7,424 shaders. The RTX 4080 Mobile's 29x advantage in shading units and 29x advantage in RT cores translate directly into the benchmark scores that place it at the 81st percentile.

The database position of the RTX 4080 Mobile is unusual. Its average score is nearly identical to the MX570, a far less capable part, and slightly below the RTX 4070 and Tesla P4. This suggests the scoring methodology compresses high-end GPUs into a narrow band. The 81st percentile ranking is respectable but not elite. The Intel part's 50th percentile ranking is based on no recorded benchmarks, so it reflects the database's default placement for unmeasured parts rather than actual performance.

For a system builder, the decision is straightforward. The RTX 4080 Mobile delivers measured, top-tier performance in every recorded test. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile offers an integrated solution with minimal power draw and no measured performance data. The RTX 4080 Mobile is the only part with evidence of high-end capability. The Intel part is best suited to low-power portable devices where the 25 W TDP and shared memory design are advantages. There is no scenario in the recorded data where the Intel part outperforms the RTX 4080 Mobile.