Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation. However, the database does include standalone benchmark scores for the NVIDIA part, which provide a reference point for its performance class.

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation achieves a Geekbench OpenCL score of 146,593 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 123,842. Its average benchmark score across recorded tests is 135,218. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has no benchmark entries in the database, and its average benchmark score is recorded as 0. This absence of recorded scores means the database cannot compute a comparative win count for either product; both head-to-head win tallies are zero.

The NVIDIA part's percentile ranking is 95, meaning it sits above 95% of all GPUs in the database. The Intel part holds a percentile rank of 50. The nearest rivals to the RTX 4000 Ada Generation, based on average benchmark score, are the NVIDIA A10M at 135,230 (a delta of 0%), the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 at 135,396 (0.1% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo at 135,774 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 at 136,472 (0.9% higher). These delta values place the RTX 4000 Ada Generation within a very tight performance cluster, with its closest competitor, the A10M, being effectively identical in average score.

Since the Intel part has no benchmark scores, any direct numerical comparison of compute performance between the two products is not possible from the database. The only quantitative performance data available belongs to the NVIDIA product.

Architecture Differences

The two products diverge substantially at the architectural level. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile is built on a 3 nm process node at Intel's foundry, using the Xe3-LPG architecture and the Wildcat Lake chip. It belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Wildcat Lake) generation. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation uses a 5 nm process node fabricated by TSMC, with the AD104 chip and the Ada Lovelace architecture, belonging to the Workstation Ada generation.

The NVIDIA chip contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a transistor density of 121.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel chip's transistor count, die size, and transistor density are all listed as unknown in the database.

Compute resources differ sharply. The Intel part has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operation units. The NVIDIA part has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Ray tracing cores are present on both: 2 on the Intel part and 48 on the NVIDIA part. The NVIDIA product also includes 192 tensor cores; the Intel product lists no tensor core count.

Clock behavior also separates the two. The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2,500 MHz. The NVIDIA part has a base clock of 1,500 MHz and a boost clock of 2,175 MHz. Memory architecture is fundamentally different: the Intel part uses system shared memory, with the capacity, type, bus width, and bandwidth all system dependent. The NVIDIA part has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 360.0 GB/s of bandwidth and running at 2,250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

The compute throughput figures reflect the resource disparity. The Intel part delivers 1,280.0 GFLOPS of FP32 performance and 2.560 TFLOPS of FP16 performance at a 2:1 ratio. The NVIDIA part delivers 26.73 TFLOPS of FP32 and 26.73 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. Pixel rate is 20.00 GPixel/s for the Intel part versus 139.2 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA part. Texture rate is 40.00 GTexel/s versus 417.6 GTexel/s.

Power and physical specifications differ as well. The Intel part has a TDP of 25 W, is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors, and uses an IGP bus interface. The NVIDIA part has a TDP of 130 W, is a single-slot card with one 16-pin power connector, a suggested PSU of 300 W, and a PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface. The NVIDIA card measures 245 mm (9.6 inches) in length and 112 mm (4.4 inches) in height. Display outputs are portable device dependent on the Intel part, while the NVIDIA part provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Both products support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel part's predecessor is HD Graphics-M; the NVIDIA part's predecessor is Workstation Ampere and its successor is Blackwell PRO W. The NVIDIA part launched on 2023-08-08, while the Intel part's release date is listed as 2026-04-15. Both are marked as Active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation delivers 26.73 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile delivers 1,280.0 GFLOPS. The NVIDIA part is substantially higher.

Q: Does the Intel part have more memory bandwidth?

A: No. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile uses system shared memory with bandwidth that is system dependent. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has dedicated 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus with 360.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the transistor count of each chip?

A: The NVIDIA AD104 chip contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The Intel Wildcat Lake chip's transistor count is listed as unknown in the database.

Q: How do the TDP figures compare?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has a TDP of 25 W. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has a TDP of 130 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W.

Q: Which product has a higher percentile ranking in the database?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation ranks at the 95th percentile across all GPUs. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile ranks at the 50th percentile.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to the NVIDIA part by average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA A10M has an average score of 135,230 with a 0% delta, the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 scores 135,396 (0.1% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo scores 135,774 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 scores 136,472 (0.9% higher).

The Verdict

The database presents two products from different performance classes. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation is a discrete workstation card with recorded benchmark scores, a 95th percentile ranking, and an average benchmark score of 135,218. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA A10M, matches it almost exactly at 135,230, while the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 sits 0.1% higher and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 sits 0.9% higher. These margins are minimal, indicating the RTX 4000 Ada Generation competes within a tight band of high-end workstation GPUs.

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores and a 50th percentile ranking. It is an integrated processor with 256 shading units, 2 ray tracing cores, and 1,280.0 GFLOPS of FP32 throughput, designed for portable devices with system shared memory. Its 25 W TDP and IGP slot width confirm its role as a low-power integrated solution.

The data indicates the NVIDIA part is the higher-performing product by every recorded metric. The Intel part's role is defined by its integration into portable devices, its 3 nm process node, and its low power envelope. The NVIDIA part's role is defined by its dedicated memory, high compute throughput, and workstation-class feature set. The choice between them is dictated by the form factor and workload: the Intel part belongs in compact, low-power systems, and the NVIDIA part belongs in systems requiring dedicated workstation-grade graphics performance. The lack of benchmark data for the Intel part means no direct performance comparison can be made from the database.

Specification Differences

The two products differ across nearly every recorded specification field.

Process and chip: Intel uses a 3 nm node at its own foundry with the Wildcat Lake chip. NVIDIA uses a 5 nm node at TSMC with the AD104 chip. The NVIDIA chip has 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die with a density of 121.8M per mm²; the Intel chip's figures are unknown.

Clocks: Intel has a 300 MHz base and 2,500 MHz boost. NVIDIA has a 1,500 MHz base and 2,175 MHz boost.

Memory: Intel uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. NVIDIA uses 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 360.0 GB/s bandwidth and an 18 Gbps effective speed.

Compute units: Intel has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, 2 RT cores, and no tensor core count. NVIDIA has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores.

Throughput: Intel delivers 1,280.0 GFLOPS FP32, 2.560 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), 20.00 GPixel/s, and 40.00 GTexel/s. NVIDIA delivers 26.73 TFLOPS FP32, 26.73 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1), 139.2 GPixel/s, and 417.6 GTexel/s.

Power and form factor: Intel has a 25 W TDP, is an IGP with no power connectors, and uses an IGP bus interface. NVIDIA has a 130 W TDP, is a single-slot card with one 16-pin connector, a 300 W suggested PSU, and a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface.

Physical dimensions: Intel has no recorded dimensions. NVIDIA measures 245 mm (9.6 inches) in length and 112 mm (4.4 inches) in height.

Display outputs: Intel is portable device dependent. NVIDIA provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Release and lineage: Intel was released on 2026-04-15 with a predecessor of HD Graphics-M. NVIDIA was released on 2023-08-08 with a predecessor of Workstation Ampere and a successor of Blackwell PRO W.

APIs are identical: both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation wins on every recorded performance metric. Its FP32 throughput of 26.73 TFLOPS is more than twenty times the Intel part's 1,280.0 GFLOPS. Its texture rate of 417.6 GTexel/s exceeds the Intel part's 40.00 GTexel/s by a wide margin. Its pixel rate of 139.2 GPixel/s compares to 20.00 GPixel/s on the Intel part. The NVIDIA part also provides dedicated 20 GB GDDR6 memory with 360.0 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the Intel part depends on system shared memory with system dependent performance.

The NVIDIA part's ray tracing resources are also substantially larger, with 48 RT cores versus 2 on the Intel part, and it is the only one of the two with tensor cores, at 192. Its benchmark presence, with an OpenCL score of 146,593 and a Vulkan score of 123,842, gives it a measurable performance footprint in the database.

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile wins on power efficiency and integration. Its 25 W TDP is far lower than the NVIDIA part's 130 W. It is an IGP with no power connectors and an IGP bus interface, making it suitable for portable devices where the display outputs are device dependent. Its 3 nm process node is smaller than the NVIDIA part's 5 nm node, and its boost clock of 2,500 MHz is higher than the NVIDIA part's 2,175 MHz boost. The Intel part's release date of 2026-04-15 places it as a newer product in the database.

For workloads requiring dedicated memory bandwidth, high compute throughput, and workstation-grade features such as tensor cores and extensive ray tracing resources, the data favors the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation. For low-power integrated graphics in portable systems where system shared memory is acceptable and no discrete card is possible, the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile is the applicable choice. The database contains no benchmark scores for the Intel part, so its real-world performance cannot be quantified here; the NVIDIA part's performance is documented and competitive with its nearest rivals, all of which fall within a 0.9% score delta.