Intel Arc Graphics 32EU vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for these two parts. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU has one recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733, placing it in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has no recorded benchmark scores, and its average benchmark score is listed as 0, though its percentile placement of 50 indicates mid-pack standing relative to the full database.

Looking at the Intel part's nearest rivals, the 733 score ties exactly with the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU and Intel Arc Graphics 64EU, both showing a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon HD 6470M trails by 1.4% with a 723 average score, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M leads by 2.4% with 751. These narrow margins suggest the 32EU sits in a performance cluster where small architectural differences produce minimal practical impact.

For the NVIDIA N1X 40SM, the absence of benchmark data means no direct numerical comparison can be drawn. The recorded information indicates a 50th percentile standing, but without scores, the delta against the Intel part cannot be quantified. The data shows winsA and winsB both at 0, confirming no head-to-head victories are recorded for either side.

Architecture Differences

The two chips diverge sharply in their underlying designs. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses the Xe-LPG architecture on TSMC's 3 nm process, part of the Arrow Lake-S chip. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM employs Blackwell 2.0 on a 5 nm TSMC node, built around the GB20B chip. Process node differences alone suggest the Intel part benefits from denser transistor packing, though the NVIDIA chip's larger die size of 382 mm² versus 243 mm² indicates a substantially bigger physical footprint.

Transistor counts tell a partial story. The Intel chip carries 17,800 million transistors with a density of 73.3M per mm². The NVIDIA part's transistor count is marked as unknown, and its density is not recorded, so direct scaling comparisons are impossible. The die size gap, however, implies the NVIDIA design allocates more silicon area, likely for its larger compute array.

Compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The Intel 32EU features 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The NVIDIA 40SM packs 5,120 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. The NVIDIA part also includes 40 RT cores and 160 tensor cores, while the Intel chip lists neither. Clock behavior also differs: Intel base clock runs at 300 MHz with a 1950 MHz boost, while NVIDIA starts at 741 MHz and boosts to 2346 MHz.

Memory architecture separates the two decisively. The Intel part uses system-shared memory with no dedicated allocation, and bandwidth is listed as system dependent. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM carries 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s. Memory clocks are also distinct: Intel relies on system memory speed, while NVIDIA runs at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU demonstrates a clear advantage in software ecosystem compatibility. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM lists all three APIs as N/A, meaning no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support is recorded. For any workload relying on standard graphics APIs, the Intel part holds the functional edge.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM wins on raw compute throughput based on the recorded specifications. Its FP32 output of 24.02 TFLOPS dwarfs the Intel part's 998.4 GFLOPS. The NVIDIA chip also delivers 750.7 GTexel/s texture rate versus 31.20 GTexel/s for Intel, and 93.84 GPixel/s pixel rate versus 15.60 GPixel/s. These figures indicate a massive throughput advantage for NVIDIA in any shader-heavy or texture-bound scenario.

The NVIDIA part's FP16 performance is notable: 24.02 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio, matching its FP32 rate. The Intel part reaches 1.997 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, meaning half rate for FP16. This gives NVIDIA a roughly 12x advantage in half-precision workloads. The NVIDIA chip's 160 tensor cores also enable AI acceleration, a feature entirely absent from the Intel specification.

Memory bandwidth favors NVIDIA decisively. The 273.2 GB/s LPDDR5X connection on a 256-bit bus contrasts with Intel's system-shared arrangement, where bandwidth depends entirely on the host platform. For workloads that saturate memory, the NVIDIA part has a structural advantage.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the NVIDIA N1X 40SM is overwhelmingly the stronger compute part. Its 5,120 shading units, 40 RT cores, 160 tensor cores, and 24.02 TFLOPS FP32 output position it far above the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU in raw capability. The Intel part's 256 shading units and 998.4 GFLOPS place it in a different performance class entirely.

However, the NVIDIA part's lack of API support is a critical caveat. With DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all listed as N/A, the recorded data suggests this chip cannot run conventional graphics workloads. The Intel part, with full API coverage, remains the functional choice for standard rendering tasks despite its lower throughput.

The 50th percentile placement for NVIDIA versus 3rd for Intel indicates the database ranks the NVIDIA part well above the Intel chip overall. Yet the absence of benchmark scores for NVIDIA means this ranking carries no measured performance data to back it. The Intel part's 733 Steel Nomad score is the only concrete benchmark result in the comparison.

For users prioritizing compute density, tensor throughput, and memory bandwidth, the NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers far more per the specifications. For users needing API compatibility and measurable benchmark results, the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU offers verified performance in a standard graphics stack. The data supports both choices depending on workload requirements.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU produces 998.4 GFLOPS.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Yes, the Intel part lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support, along with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What memory configuration does the NVIDIA N1X 40SM use?

A: The NVIDIA part uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, providing 273.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the two parts compare in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU scores 733. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has no recorded benchmark score in the database.

Q: Does the NVIDIA N1X 40SM include ray tracing hardware?

A: Yes, the NVIDIA part includes 40 RT cores. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU does not list RT core availability.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores for AI workloads?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM includes 160 tensor cores. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU lists no tensor cores.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc Graphics 32EU | NVIDIA N1X 40SM |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Architecture | Xe-LPG | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Die Size | 243 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Transistors | 17,800 million | unknown |

| Base Clock | 300 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1950 MHz | 2346 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 273.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 256 | 5,120 |

| TMUs | 16 | 320 |

| ROPs | 8 | 40 |

| RT Cores | null | 40 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 160 |

| Pixel Rate | 15.60 GPixel/s | 93.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 31.20 GTexel/s | 750.7 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 998.4 GFLOPS | 24.02 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 1.997 TFLOPS (2:1) | 24.02 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 65 W | unknown |

| Bus Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Motherboard Dependent | 1x HDMI |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | N/A |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Release Date | 2024-10-23 | 2026-05-31 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 3 | 50 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 733 | 0 |