Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile vs NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core specifications of the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile is built on a 3 nm process using the Xe3-LPG architecture. It has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 2 RT cores. Its base clock is 300 MHz with a boost clock of 2500 MHz. Memory is system shared, meaning both size and bandwidth are system dependent.

Q: What are the key specifications of the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation uses the AD107 chip on a 5 nm process from TSMC. It features 2816 shading units, 88 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 22 RT cores, and 88 tensor cores. It has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The base clock is 1620 MHz and boost clock is 2130 MHz.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in terms of power consumption?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has a TDP of 25 W, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation has a TDP of 70 W. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation also suggests a 250 W PSU, whereas the Intel part is an integrated GPU with no power connectors.

Q: What is the release date of each product?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has a release date of 2026-04-15. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation has a release date of 2024-02-11.

Q: What benchmark scores does the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation have?

A: The RTX 2000 Ada Generation has an average benchmark score of 18954. Its individual scores include 1767 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 78074 in Geekbench OpenCL, 83360 in Geekbench Vulkan, and 16927 in Passmark G3D, among others.

Q: What is the overall performance percentile of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile sits at the 50th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation sits at the 63rd percentile, placing it notably higher in the overall distribution.

The Verdict

The data in the database separates these two products clearly by role and capability. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile is an integrated graphics processor built for the Wildcat Lake generation. It carries only 256 shading units and 2 RT cores, and it relies on system shared memory for all graphics data. Its recorded TDP is 25 W, and it is slotted as an IGP with no power connectors. The database places it at the 50th percentile across all GPUs.

The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation is a discrete workstation card. It uses the AD107 chip, has 2816 shading units, 22 RT cores, and 88 tensor cores, and it carries 16 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory with a 128-bit bus. Its TDP is 70 W, and it comes as a dual-slot card with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The database places it at the 63rd percentile, with an average benchmark score of 18954.

The verdict from the recorded data is straightforward: the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation is the substantially more capable compute and rendering device. Its shading unit count is over ten times that of the Intel part, its texture rate is 187.4 GTexel/s versus 40.00 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate is 102.2 GPixel/s versus 20.00 GPixel/s. Its FP32 throughput is 12.00 TFLOPS versus 1,280.0 GFLOPS for the Intel GPU.

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile is intended for systems where low power and integration matter more than raw throughput. Its 25 W TDP and IGP form factor make it suitable for portable devices. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation, with its 70 W TDP and dual-slot design, is a dedicated workstation component. The data shows no benchmark results for the Intel part, while the NVIDIA card has a full suite of recorded scores. Users requiring dedicated graphics memory, high FP32 throughput, and workstation display outputs should select the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation. Users constrained to integrated graphics in a mobile platform will find the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile as the only option in this comparison.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table in the database is empty, so no direct same-test comparisons are available. However, the recorded data for the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation provides a full set of scores that can be interpreted against the Intel part's lack of any benchmark entries.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation delivers an average benchmark score of 18954. Its nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 at 19030, which is 0.4% higher, and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 at 19036, also 0.4% higher. The NVIDIA Tesla K80 trails by 0.5% with a score of 18866, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile leads the RTX 2000 Ada Generation by 0.5% with a score of 19049. This places the RTX 2000 Ada Generation in a tight cluster where it is within half a percent of several established desktop and mobile parts.

In specific workloads, the RTX 2000 Ada Generation shows strong compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 78074, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 83360. In Passmark, it records 16927 in G3D, 7834 in GPU compute, and 1072 in G2D. Legacy DirectX tests show 216 in DirectX 9, 138 in DirectX 11, 82 in DirectX 10, and 71 in DirectX 12. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1767.

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has no benchmark scores recorded in the database. Its theoretical rates are its only measurable data points. The pixel rate of 20.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 40.00 GTexel/s are derived from its 256 shading units and clock speeds. The FP32 figure of 1,280.0 GFLOPS is exactly 10.67% of the RTX 2000 Ada Generation's 12.00 TFLOPS. The Intel part's FP16 rating is 2.560 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the NVIDIA card delivers 12.00 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, a difference that matters for compute workloads relying on FP16 throughput.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification.

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile uses a 3 nm process node fabricated by Intel itself. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation uses a 5 nm process from TSMC. The Intel chip is called Wildcat Lake, while the NVIDIA chip is AD107. Intel's architecture is Xe3-LPG, and NVIDIA's is Ada Lovelace.

The shading unit count is 256 for Intel versus 2816 for NVIDIA. Texture mapping units number 16 versus 88. Raster output units are 8 versus 48. Ray tracing cores are 2 versus 22. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation also includes 88 tensor cores, a feature class entirely absent from the Intel part.

Clock behavior differs substantially. 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 1620 MHz and a boost clock of 2130 MHz. The Intel part has no game clock listed, and neither does the NVIDIA part.

Memory is the largest architectural difference. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile uses system shared memory, with size, type, bus width, and bandwidth all system dependent. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its memory clock is listed as 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective.

Rates and throughput differ accordingly. Intel's pixel rate is 20.00 GPixel/s, and NVIDIA's is 102.2 GPixel/s. Intel's texture rate is 40.00 GTexel/s, and NVIDIA's is 187.4 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1,280.0 GFLOPS versus 12.00 TFLOPS. FP16 is 2.560 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 12.00 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and physical specifications also diverge. The Intel part has a TDP of 25 W, is an IGP, has no power connectors, and uses an IGP bus interface. The NVIDIA part has a TDP of 70 W, is dual-slot, has no power connectors but suggests a 250 W PSU, and uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The NVIDIA card is 168 mm long and 69 mm high. The Intel part has no dimensions listed.

Display outputs differ as well. The Intel GPU's outputs are portable device dependent. The NVIDIA card has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile is built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, which is Intel's third-generation Xe graphics design used in the Wildcat Lake generation. It is produced on a 3 nm node at Intel's own foundry. The transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database. The architecture includes 2 dedicated ray tracing cores but no tensor cores.

The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on the AD107 chip. It is manufactured by TSMC on a 5 nm process. The database records 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 118.9M per mm². Ada Lovelace includes 22 ray tracing cores and 88 tensor cores, both of which are absent or minimal on the Intel part.

The Intel GPU is part of the Arc Graphics-M generation with the predecessor listed as HD Graphics-M. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA card also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API coverage is identical.

The Intel part's memory architecture is entirely system dependent. This means the GPU shares main system memory, and bandwidth will vary with the host platform. The NVIDIA card has dedicated 16 GB of GDDR6 with a fixed 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, a decisive advantage for large datasets and sustained workloads.

The production status for both is Active. The Intel part's release date is 2026-04-15, and the NVIDIA part's release date is 2024-02-11. The NVIDIA part has a successor listed as Blackwell PRO W, while the Intel part's successor is not recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation wins in every category where direct measurement exists. Its average benchmark score of 18954 places it at the 63rd percentile, while the Intel part has no recorded score and sits at the 50th percentile. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation has 16 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory, which guarantees predictable bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel part's memory bandwidth is system dependent, so no fixed figure exists.

For FP32 compute, the NVIDIA card delivers 12.00 TFLOPS, which is 9.375 times the Intel part's 1,280.0 GFLOPS. For FP16, the NVIDIA card again delivers 12.00 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part delivers 2.560 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. The NVIDIA card's 88 tensor cores give it a machine learning capability the Intel part cannot match. The 22 RT cores versus 2 also point to stronger ray tracing throughput.

The NVIDIA card's pixel rate of 102.2 GPixel/s is 5.11 times the Intel part's 20.00 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 187.4 GTexel/s is 4.685 times the Intel part's 40.00 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA card's four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs make it suitable for multi-display workstation setups, while the Intel part's outputs are portable device dependent.

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile wins only in power efficiency and integration. Its 25 W TDP is 45 W lower than the NVIDIA card's 70 W. It is an IGP with no power connectors and no slot width, meaning it occupies no expansion slot and requires no external power. The NVIDIA card is a dual-slot design with a 250 W suggested PSU. For systems where power draw and physical footprint are the primary constraints, the Intel part is the only viable choice.

The database shows no benchmark wins for either GPU in a head-to-head table, as that table is empty. Based on the recorded scores and specifications, the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation is the clear performance winner. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile is the clear integration and low-power winner. Each product serves a different segment, and the data supports that separation without ambiguity.