Intel Arc Graphics 32EU vs Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits cleanly between these two integrated graphics parts, but not in the way one might expect from their names alone. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU, part of the Arrow Lake-S generation, has one recorded benchmark result: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733. This places it in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, which is a very low standing. It has no wins in head-to-head comparisons because no direct comparative benchmark data exists between the two parts.

The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile, from the Panther Lake generation, has a different profile entirely. It has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, which means its average benchmark score is listed as zero and it has no nearest rivals. Its percentile rank against all GPUs is 50, which is a mid-pack position, but this figure exists without any supporting score data. The wins column for both parts is zero, which simply means the database has no direct comparison results to draw from.

What the data shows is that the 32EU part is a known quantity with a single data point, while the 4 Xe Mobile is an unknown quantity with no measured results. The 32EU's score of 733 puts it in company with the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU (733, 0% delta), the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU (733, 0% delta), the AMD Radeon HD 6470M (723, 1.4% faster), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M (751, 2.4% slower). This is a cluster of very low-end parts, and the 32EU is essentially at parity with its immediate siblings.

The 4 Xe Mobile cannot be placed on any performance curve because there is nothing to compare. Its percentile rank suggests it sits in the middle of the database's GPU distribution, but without a score, that rank is not backed by measured performance. The practical takeaway is that the 32EU wins in the category of having verifiable data, while the 4 Xe Mobile wins in the category of theoretical positioning, but neither part has a demonstrated performance advantage over the other in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two parts come from different foundries and different architectures. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses the Xe-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The chip is Arrow Lake-S, with a transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm². The transistor density is 73.3M per mm². The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses the Xe3-LPG architecture, also on a 3 nm process, but fabricated by Intel. Its chip is Panther Lake, with unknown transistor count and die size, and no transistor density listed.

The execution resources differ substantially. The 32EU has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operation units. The 4 Xe Mobile doubles each of these: 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The 4 Xe Mobile also includes 4 ray tracing cores, while the 32EU has none listed. Neither part has tensor cores listed.

Clock behavior differs as well. The 32EU has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1950 MHz. The 4 Xe Mobile also has a 300 MHz base clock, but its boost clock is higher at 2300 MHz. Both use system-shared memory, with system-shared bus width and system-dependent bandwidth.

The power envelope is very different. The 32EU has a TDP of 65 W, while the 4 Xe Mobile is rated at 25 W. This is a 40 W difference in favor of the mobile part, which is notable given the 4 Xe Mobile has more than double the shading units and a higher boost clock. The 32EU is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface, while the 4 Xe Mobile is also an IGP but with an IGP bus interface and no power connectors listed.

API support is identical on paper: both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The display outputs differ, with the 32EU being motherboard-dependent and the 4 Xe Mobile being portable-device-dependent.

The release dates are separated by over a year. The 32EU was released on 2024-10-23, and the 4 Xe Mobile on 2026-01-26. The 32EU has a listed predecessor, HD Graphics-M, while the 4 Xe Mobile has none. Both are marked as active production parts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There are no head-to-head benchmark entries in the database for these two parts. The head-to-head array is empty, and both wins counters are zero. This means there is no direct measurement where one part beats the other in any specific test.

What the database does provide is a single score for the 32EU and an empty benchmark list for the 4 Xe Mobile. The 32EU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733 is the only concrete number available. Its nearest rivals show how tightly clustered this part is: the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU and 64EU both score exactly 733, a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon HD 6470M scores 723, which is 1.4% lower, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M scores 751, which is 2.4% higher.

These deltas are small. The 32EU is effectively tied with the 24EU and 64EU, marginally ahead of the Radeon HD 6470M, and marginally behind the GeForce GT 415M. The entire group spans less than 4% performance difference, which indicates a very narrow performance band around the 733 mark.

The 4 Xe Mobile has no scores, no rivals, and no deltas. Its percentile rank of 50 suggests it should sit somewhere in the middle of the database's GPU population, but there is no measurement to confirm this. The absence of data means no head-to-head analysis can be performed, and no statement can be made about which part is faster in any specific workload.

The recorded data shows the 32EU as a measured, low-end part. The 4 Xe Mobile is an unmeasured part with a mid-pack percentile rank. Without direct comparisons, the only conclusion available is that the 32EU has a verified score and the 4 Xe Mobile does not.

FAQ

Q: What is the single benchmark score available for the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU?

A: The 32EU scores 733 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12.

Q: How does the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It is exactly tied with the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU and 64EU (both 733, 0% delta). It is 1.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 6470M (723) and 2.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M (751).

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile have any benchmark results?

A: No, the database lists no benchmark scores for the 4 Xe Mobile. Its average benchmark score is 0, and it has no nearest rivals.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each part?

A: The 32EU is in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs. The 4 Xe Mobile is in the 50th percentile, though this is not backed by any measured score.

Q: Which part has more shading units?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has 512 shading units, double the 256 shading units of the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two parts?

A: The 32EU has a 65 W TDP, while the 4 Xe Mobile has a 25 W TDP.

The Verdict

The data supports only limited conclusions. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU is a measured part with a 733 score in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it in the 3rd percentile. Its performance is nearly identical to the 24EU and 64EU variants, and it sits within a few percent of a very old AMD part and a very old NVIDIA part. This is a low-end integrated GPU by every measurable standard.

The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has no measured data. Its 50th percentile rank is a placeholder without a score to support it. The hardware specifications are substantially stronger on paper: double the shading units, double the TMUs, double the ROPs, 4 ray tracing cores, a higher boost clock, and a much lower TDP. But the database contains no benchmark to confirm that these specifications translate into actual performance.

For anyone choosing between these two parts, the 32EU is the only one with verified performance data. It is a weak performer, tied with its lower and higher EU siblings, and barely faster than a Radeon HD 6470M. The 4 Xe Mobile is an unproven quantity. Its specifications suggest it should be significantly faster, but no measurement exists to back that up.

The production status of both parts is active, and the 4 Xe Mobile is the newer release by over a year. The 32EU has a predecessor, the HD Graphics-M, while the 4 Xe Mobile does not. The 4 Xe Mobile uses the newer Xe3-LPG architecture and is built at Intel's own foundry, while the 32EU uses Xe-LPG at TSMC.

The verdict from the data is straightforward: the 32EU is a known, low-end performer, and the 4 Xe Mobile is a higher-spec part with no proven results. Anyone relying on measured data would pick the 32EU solely because it has a score. Anyone relying on specifications would expect the 4 Xe Mobile to be stronger, but the database cannot confirm that expectation.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in the following recorded fields:

• Chip: Arrow Lake-S for the 32EU, Panther Lake for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Architecture: Xe-LPG for the 32EU, Xe3-LPG for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Foundry: TSMC for the 32EU, Intel for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Transistors: 17,800 million for the 32EU, unknown for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Die size: 243 mm² for the 32EU, unknown for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Transistor density: 73.3M / mm² for the 32EU, not listed for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Boost clock: 1950 MHz for the 32EU, 2300 MHz for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Shading units: 256 for the 32EU, 512 for the 4 Xe Mobile
• TMUs: 16 for the 32EU, 32 for the 4 Xe Mobile
• ROPs: 8 for the 32EU, 16 for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Ray tracing cores: none for the 32EU, 4 for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Pixel rate: 15.60 GPixel/s for the 32EU, 36.80 GPixel/s for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Texture rate: 31.20 GTexel/s for the 32EU, 73.60 GTexel/s for the 4 Xe Mobile
• FP32 performance: 998.4 GFLOPS for the 32EU, 2.355 TFLOPS for the 4 Xe Mobile
• FP16 performance: 1.997 TFLOPS (2:1) for the 32EU, 4.710 TFLOPS (2:1) for the 4 Xe Mobile
• TDP: 65 W for the 32EU, 25 W for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Power connectors: none listed for the 32EU, "None" for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Bus interface: Ring Bus for the 32EU, IGP for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Display outputs: Motherboard Dependent for the 32EU, Portable Device Dependent for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Release date: 2024-10-23 for the 32EU, 2026-01-26 for the 4 Xe Mobile
• Predecessor: HD Graphics-M for the 32EU, none for the 4 Xe Mobile

Fields that match include the 3 nm process node, 300 MHz base clock, system-shared memory type and size, system-shared bus width, system-dependent bandwidth, DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4, IGP slot width, active production status, and the absence of a launch MSRP.