Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER Comparison

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER occupy opposite ends of the graphics spectrum. The Intel part is an integrated solution for portable devices, while the NVIDIA part is a discrete desktop card with a dedicated 16 GB frame buffer. The recorded data shows a stark contrast in raw compute, memory throughput, and physical design, with the only shared traits being API support and production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER shows a single recorded result in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12) with a score of 6269.5. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, which prevents a direct numerical comparison in any specific workload. The absence of measurements for the Intel part means the database cannot quantify its performance in the same test.

What the data does provide is context for the NVIDIA score. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER achieves an average benchmark score of 6270 across its recorded runs. Its nearest rivals cluster tightly around this figure. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 posts an identical average score of 6270, representing a 0% delta. The AMD FirePro W600 trails slightly with a score of 6223, which is 0.8% behind. The NVIDIA Quadro K620 posts 6282, putting it 0.2% ahead of the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER, while the AMD Radeon R7 M350 leads the group with 6327, a 0.9% advantage.

This tight grouping indicates that the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER sits within a narrow performance band among its closest peers. The 0.8% lead over the AMD FirePro W600 and the 0.9% deficit to the AMD Radeon R7 M350 are minor margins, well within typical run-to-run variance for a single benchmark. The data shows that the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER does not dominate its nearest rivals; it trades places with them depending on the specific comparison.

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has no benchmark entries, so its percentile ranking of 50 among all GPUs is based on the database's overall evaluation rather than any measured workload. The NVIDIA part holds a percentile ranking of 36, which is lower than the Intel part's 50. This might seem counterintuitive given the NVIDIA card's dedicated memory and much higher compute figures, but the percentile reflects the database's aggregate categorization, not the specific Steel Nomad result.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile wins in power efficiency and physical integration by the numbers available. Its thermal design power is 25 W, compared to 350 W for the NVIDIA card. This is a 14-fold difference in power draw, which makes the Intel part suitable for systems with minimal cooling and no external power connectors. The Intel part uses a system-shared memory architecture, meaning it draws from the host's RAM rather than carrying dedicated video memory. Its bus interface is IGP, indicating it is integrated directly into the processor package.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER wins decisively in raw computational throughput. Its FP32 performance is 43.94 TFLOPS versus 1,280.0 GFLOPS (1.28 TFLOPS) for the Intel part. That is roughly 34 times higher in single-precision floating-point math. The texture fill rate tells a similar story: 686.6 GTexel/s versus 40.00 GTexel/s, a difference of about 17 times. The pixel rate is 235.4 GPixel/s versus 20.00 GPixel/s, an 11.8-fold gap. The NVIDIA card also has 70 ray tracing cores and 280 tensor cores, while the Intel part has 2 ray tracing cores and no listed tensor cores.

Memory bandwidth is another categorical win for the NVIDIA card. It uses 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 896.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part uses system-shared memory with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent," which means its performance varies based on the host platform's memory configuration. In any realistic scenario, the dedicated GDDR7 bandwidth will vastly exceed what a shared memory setup can provide.

The NVIDIA card wins on physical features as well. It has a dual-slot cooler, a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, and display outputs including 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. The Intel part has no dedicated display outputs listed, instead relying on "Portable Device Dependent" connections. The NVIDIA card measures 304 mm in length, 137 mm in height, and 48 mm in width. The Intel part has no dimensions listed because it is an IGP, mounted directly on the host processor.

The Verdict

The data points to two entirely different product categories. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile is designed for low-power mobile devices where space and cooling are constrained. Its 25 W TDP, system-shared memory, and IGP form factor confirm this. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER is a high-performance desktop component with a 350 W TDP, dedicated 16 GB GDDR7 memory, and a dual-slot cooler. Its launch MSRP is 749 USD, reflecting its positioning as a premium discrete GPU.

For users who need maximum rendering throughput, the NVIDIA card is the only option with measured data. The Steel Nomad score of 6269.5, while roughly matched by its nearest rivals, places it in a performance tier that the Intel part cannot approach based on the compute specifications. The FP32 figure of 43.94 TFLOPS and the 896.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are orders of magnitude beyond the Intel part's shared-memory architecture.

For users who prioritize low power consumption and minimal physical footprint, the Intel part has no competition from the NVIDIA card. The 25 W TDP is 14 times lower than the NVIDIA's 350 W. The Intel part requires no power connectors and fits within the host processor package, which is critical for thin-and-light laptops or compact portable devices. The NVIDIA card requires a 16-pin power connector and a dual-slot expansion slot.

The production status for both is Active, and both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The API parity means software compatibility is not a differentiator. The choice comes down to form factor and power envelope versus raw performance.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER in FP32 compute compared to the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile?

A: The NVIDIA card delivers 43.94 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel part delivers 1,280.0 GFLOPS (1.28 TFLOPS). This represents roughly a 34 times advantage for the NVIDIA card.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER uses 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus with 896.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile uses system-shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, and its bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent."

Q: What are the power consumption figures for both parts?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has a TDP of 25 W. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER has a TDP of 350 W. The Intel part consumes 14 times less power.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER has 70 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has 2 ray tracing cores.

Q: What benchmark scores are recorded for these GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6269.5 and an average benchmark score of 6270. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has no recorded benchmark scores in the database.

Q: How does the NVIDIA card compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER has an average score of 6270. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 matches it at 6270 (0% delta). The AMD FirePro W600 scores 6223 (0.8% behind), the NVIDIA Quadro K620 scores 6282 (0.2% ahead), and the AMD Radeon R7 M350 scores 6327 (0.9% ahead).

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs use entirely different architectures. The Intel part is built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, part of the Arc Graphics-M generation for the Wildcat Lake chip. The NVIDIA part uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture on the GB203 chip, part of the GeForce 50 series.

The manufacturing processes differ significantly. Intel uses a 3 nm process node at its own foundry. NVIDIA uses a 5 nm process node at TSMC. The NVIDIA chip contains 45,600 million transistors on a die size of 378 mm², giving a transistor density of 120.6 million transistors per mm². The Intel part has unknown transistor count and die size in the database.

The NVIDIA card includes dedicated hardware for ray tracing and AI workloads. It has 70 RT cores and 280 tensor cores. The Intel part has 2 RT cores and no listed tensor cores. This reflects a fundamental design split: NVIDIA allocates substantial silicon area to specialized acceleration units, while Intel keeps its integrated solution minimal.

The memory architecture also differs at a fundamental level. The NVIDIA card uses a 256-bit memory bus with 16 GB of GDDR7, achieving 896.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part has no dedicated memory bus; it shares the system memory, with bandwidth dependent on the host platform. The NVIDIA memory clock is 1750 MHz with an effective data rate of 28 Gbps. The Intel memory clock is listed as "System Shared."

Both parts support the same API level for graphics: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This means software written to those APIs will run on either, though the performance envelope will be vastly different.

Specification Differences

The core configuration differs by an order of magnitude. The NVIDIA card has 8,960 shading units, 280 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units. The Intel part has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The NVIDIA card has 70 RT cores and 280 tensor cores, while the Intel part has 2 RT cores and no tensor cores.

Clock speeds are closer than expected. The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. The NVIDIA card has a base clock of 2295 MHz and a boost clock of 2452 MHz. The Intel part actually boosts higher than the NVIDIA card, but its much smaller core configuration limits total throughput.

Fill rates follow the core counts. The NVIDIA card achieves 235.4 GPixel/s and 686.6 GTexel/s. The Intel part achieves 20.00 GPixel/s and 40.00 GTexel/s. FP16 performance shows a different ratio: the NVIDIA card delivers 43.94 TFLOPS in FP16 with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the Intel part delivers 2.560 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio.

The physical specifications are entirely different. The NVIDIA card is a dual-slot, 304 mm long, 137 mm high, and 48 mm wide, requiring a 16-pin power connector and a PCIe 5.0 x16 slot. The Intel part is an IGP with no dimensions, no power connectors, and an IGP bus interface. The NVIDIA card has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs. The Intel part relies on "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs.

The NVIDIA card has a release date of 2025-12-31 and a launch MSRP of 749 USD. The Intel part has a release date of 2026-04-15 and no launch MSRP listed. The Intel part's predecessor is HD Graphics-M, while the NVIDIA card has no predecessor listed. The NVIDIA card's series is GeForce 50-series, while the Intel part's series is listed as null, with its generation identified as Arc Graphics-M (Wildcat Lake).