Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile vs NVIDIA H100 CNX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark scores for the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile and the NVIDIA H100 CNX. Both entries show an average benchmark score of 0, and the wins counter registers 0 for each side. This absence of direct comparative data means the performance relationship between these two parts cannot be established through measured frame rates, compute throughput, or synthetic workloads.

The lack of recorded results is not surprising given the fundamental positioning of each product. The Intel part is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) built for portable devices, while the NVIDIA part is a dual-slot server accelerator with no display outputs. The database does not list a single shared benchmark application where both were tested under identical conditions. Without such data, any attempt to declare a performance winner would be speculation rather than analysis.

What the data does show is the theoretical throughput ceiling of each design. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile delivers 1,280.0 GFLOPS of FP32 compute and 2.560 TFLOPS of FP16 compute (2:1 ratio). The NVIDIA H100 CNX delivers 53.84 TFLOPS of FP32 and 215.4 TFLOPS of FP16 (4:1 ratio). These raw specification figures indicate the NVIDIA part operates in a different performance class entirely, but they are not benchmark scores. They do not reflect real-world application behavior, driver efficiency, thermal throttling, or workload suitability.

The percentile fields for both GPUs sit at 50, which places each exactly at the median of all GPUs in the database. This is an artifact of the missing benchmark data rather than a meaningful comparison. A percentile of 50 with zero recorded scores simply reflects the default state of an unmeasured entry.

FAQ

Q: Does the database show any benchmark results comparing these two GPUs?

A: No. Both entries have an average benchmark score of 0, zero recorded benchmarks in their benchmark arrays, and zero wins in the head-to-head counter. No comparative performance data exists in the database for this pairing.

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference between the two?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile records 1,280.0 GFLOPS of FP32, while the NVIDIA H100 CNX records 53.84 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA part has roughly 42 times the FP32 throughput, though this is a specification comparison, not a benchmark result.

Q: How do their memory configurations differ?

A: The Intel GPU uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth and a system-shared bus width. The NVIDIA H100 CNX uses 80 GB of HBM2e on a 5120-bit bus with 2.04 TB/s of dedicated bandwidth.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The Intel Wildcat Lake chip is fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel. The NVIDIA GH100 chip is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Q: Do either of these GPUs support DirectX?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA H100 CNX lists no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support in the database, consistent with its server accelerator role.

Q: What are the TDP values?

A: The Intel integrated GPU has a TDP of 25 W. The NVIDIA H100 CNX has a TDP of 350 W and a suggested PSU rating of 750 W.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent entirely different architectural philosophies. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile uses the Xe3-LPG architecture on a chip called Wildcat Lake, belonging to the Arc Graphics-M (Wildcat Lake) generation. It is built on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The NVIDIA H100 CNX uses the Hopper architecture on the GH100 chip, belonging to the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation. It is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

The transistor counts tell a stark story. The NVIDIA chip integrates 80,000 million transistors on a die size of 814 mm², yielding a transistor density of 98.3M per mm². The Intel chip's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database. This difference in scale reflects the intended deployment: one is a compact integrated solution for portable devices, the other is a massive discrete accelerator for server racks.

Compute resources diverge sharply. The Intel part has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, 8 raster operation units, and 2 ray tracing cores. It has no dedicated tensor cores listed. The NVIDIA part has 14,592 shading units, 456 texture mapping units, 24 raster operation units, and 456 tensor cores. It has no ray tracing cores listed. The NVIDIA part's tensor core count matches its TMU count exactly, indicating a design heavily weighted toward matrix math and AI workloads. The Intel part's 2 RT cores indicate a focus on real-time graphics rendering, which is absent on the NVIDIA server card.

Clock behavior also differs. The Intel GPU has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. The NVIDIA GPU has a base clock of 690 MHz and a boost clock of 1845 MHz. The Intel part's higher boost clock relative to its base suggests a wide dynamic range for power management, typical of mobile integrated graphics. The NVIDIA part's lower boost clock but far wider execution resources means its performance comes from parallelism rather than clock speed.

The memory subsystem is fundamentally different. Intel uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth, meaning the GPU borrows from the host's main memory. NVIDIA uses 80 GB of HBM2e on a 5120-bit bus with 2.04 TB/s of bandwidth, a dedicated high-bandwidth pool for massive data movement.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split by intended use case, not a direct competition. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile is an integrated graphics processor with a 25 W TDP, no power connectors, an IGP bus interface, and display outputs that are portable-device dependent. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This is a graphics solution for a laptop or handheld device, designed to render images to a screen.

The NVIDIA H100 CNX is a dual-slot server accelerator with a 350 W TDP, an 8-pin EPS power connector, a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, and no display outputs. It has no listed graphics API support. This is a compute engine for datacenter workloads, designed to process tensor operations and massive parallel math without ever driving a monitor.

Who should pick which comes down to the workload. The database indicates the Intel part is active and released on 2026-04-15, with a predecessor of HD Graphics-M. The NVIDIA part is active and released on 2023-03-20, with a predecessor of Server Ada and a successor of Server Blackwell. The Intel part's 256 shading units and 2 RT cores suit graphics rendering on power-constrained portable systems. The NVIDIA part's 456 tensor cores and 80 GB of HBM2e suit training and inference tasks that require enormous memory bandwidth and matrix throughput.

Neither part can substitute for the other in its respective domain. The Intel GPU cannot approach the compute density of the NVIDIA accelerator, and the NVIDIA accelerator cannot output video to a display. The data does not support a recommendation for one over the other. It supports a recommendation for the right tool per role.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile and the NVIDIA H100 CNX:

• Chip: Intel uses Wildcat Lake; NVIDIA uses GH100.
• Architecture: Intel uses Xe3-LPG; NVIDIA uses Hopper.
• Generation: Intel is Arc Graphics-M (Wildcat Lake); NVIDIA is Server Hopper (Hxx).
• Process node: Intel is 3 nm; NVIDIA is 5 nm.
• Foundry: Intel is Intel; NVIDIA is TSMC.
• Transistors: Intel is unknown; NVIDIA is 80,000 million.
• Die size: Intel is unknown; NVIDIA is 814 mm².
• Transistor density: Intel has no listed value; NVIDIA is 98.3M / mm².
• Base clock: Intel is 300 MHz; NVIDIA is 690 MHz.
• Boost clock: Intel is 2500 MHz; NVIDIA is 1845 MHz.
• Memory clock: Intel is system shared; NVIDIA is 1593 MHz with 3.2 Gbps effective.
• Memory size: Intel is system shared; NVIDIA is 80 GB.
• Memory type: Intel is system shared; NVIDIA is HBM2e.
• Memory bus width: Intel is system shared; NVIDIA is 5120 bit.
• Memory bandwidth: Intel is system dependent; NVIDIA is 2.04 TB/s.
• Shading units: Intel has 256; NVIDIA has 14,592.
• TMUs: Intel has 16; NVIDIA has 456.
• ROPs: Intel has 8; NVIDIA has 24.
• RT cores: Intel has 2; NVIDIA has no listed value.
• Tensor cores: Intel has no listed value; NVIDIA has 456.
• Pixel rate: Intel is 20.00 GPixel/s; NVIDIA is 44.28 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: Intel is 40.00 GTexel/s; NVIDIA is 841.3 GTexel/s.
• FP32: Intel is 1,280.0 GFLOPS; NVIDIA is 53.84 TFLOPS.
• FP16: Intel is 2.560 TFLOPS (2:1); NVIDIA is 215.4 TFLOPS (4:1).
• TDP: Intel is 25 W; NVIDIA is 350 W.
• Slot width: Intel is IGP; NVIDIA is dual-slot.
• Power connectors: Intel is none; NVIDIA is 8-pin EPS.
• Suggested PSU: Intel has no listed value; NVIDIA is 750 W.
• Bus interface: Intel is IGP; NVIDIA is PCIe 5.0 x16.
• Display outputs: Intel is portable device dependent; NVIDIA is no outputs.
• DirectX: Intel is 12 Ultimate (12_2); NVIDIA has no listed value.
• OpenGL: Intel is 4.6; NVIDIA has no listed value.
• Vulkan: Intel is 1.4; NVIDIA has no listed value.
• Dimensions: Intel has no listed length or height; NVIDIA is 267 mm long and 111 mm tall.
• Release date: Intel is 2026-04-15; NVIDIA is 2023-03-20.
• Predecessor: Intel is HD Graphics-M; NVIDIA is Server Ada.
• Successor: Intel has no listed successor; NVIDIA is Server Blackwell.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile wins in portability and graphics feature support. Its 25 W TDP, IGP form factor, and lack of power connectors mean it fits into thin portable devices with no additional cooling or power delivery infrastructure. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support enables modern real-time rendering features, and its 2 RT cores provide hardware ray tracing capability. The 300 MHz base clock to 2500 MHz boost clock range indicates responsive power scaling for battery-conscious workloads. Its 20.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 40.00 GTexel/s texture rate are modest figures that match its integrated role. The OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4 support broaden its compatibility across graphics APIs.

The NVIDIA H100 CNX wins in raw compute scale and memory capacity. Its 53.84 TFLOPS of FP32 and 215.4 TFLOPS of FP16 give it an enormous throughput advantage on paper. Its 456 tensor cores are purpose-built for the matrix operations that dominate machine learning workloads. The 80 GB of HBM2e on a 5120-bit bus with 2.04 TB/s of bandwidth provides a memory pool that dwarfs any system-shared arrangement. Its 44.28 GPixel/s pixel rate and 841.3 GTexel/s texture rate are far higher than the Intel part, though these metrics matter less for a GPU with no display outputs. The 267 mm length and 111 mm height indicate a physical card designed for server chassis, not portable devices. The 350 W TDP and 8-pin EPS connector require dedicated power delivery. The 750 W suggested PSU rating signals the total system power envelope expected around this card.

The release dates show different product lifecycles. The NVIDIA part launched on 2023-03-20 and has a successor in Server Blackwell. The Intel part launched on 2026-04-15 with no successor listed. The Intel predecessor HD Graphics-M indicates a lineage of integrated graphics, while the NVIDIA predecessor Server Ada and successor Server Blackwell show a continuous server accelerator line.

The data indicates the Intel part wins where power efficiency, physical integration, and display capability matter. The NVIDIA part wins where absolute compute throughput, memory bandwidth, and tensor performance matter. The two do not compete for the same socket, the same power budget, or the same workload.