Intel Arc Graphics 32EU vs NVIDIA N1X 48SM Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU is an integrated graphics processor based on the Xe-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. It is part of the Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) generation and uses the Arrow Lake-S chip. It was released on October 23, 2024.

Q: What is the NVIDIA N1X 48SM?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 48SM is an integrated graphics processor based on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It is part of the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation and uses the GB20B chip. Its release date is May 31, 2026.

Q: What benchmark data is available for these two GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU has one recorded benchmark result: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, and its average benchmark score is listed as 0.

Q: How does the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU rank among all GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU sits at the 3rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M, scores 751, which is 2.4% higher, while the AMD Radeon HD 6470M scores 723, which is 1.4% lower.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses system-shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM features 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What API support does each GPU provide?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A in the database.

The Verdict

The data presents an unusual comparison. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU has a recorded benchmark score, while the NVIDIA N1X 48SM has no benchmark entries at all. The Intel part lands at the 3rd percentile of all GPUs, placing it firmly in entry-level territory for integrated graphics. The NVIDIA part, despite lacking benchmark scores, holds the 50th percentile ranking, suggesting it performs around the median of all GPUs based on its specifications.

For users who need a working, measurable integrated GPU today, the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU is the only option with verified performance data. It delivers a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733, which places it near older discrete mobile parts like the AMD Radeon HD 6470M and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM cannot be recommended based on measured results because none exist in the database.

However, the specification sheet tells a different story. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM carries 6144 shading units, 384 texture mapping units, 48 render output units, 48 ray tracing cores, and 192 tensor cores. It boosts to 2346 MHz and produces 28.83 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The Intel part, by comparison, has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, no dedicated RT or tensor cores, and reaches 998.4 GFLOPS of FP32. The NVIDIA part is several orders of magnitude more powerful on paper.

The verdict splits along data availability. If the decision rests on measured benchmark results, only the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU qualifies. If the decision rests on architectural capability and specification headroom, the NVIDIA N1X 48SM dominates every measurable hardware category. The database records no head-to-head benchmark wins for either GPU, so no direct performance comparison exists.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries between the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and the NVIDIA N1X 48SM. The wins counter shows 0 for both GPUs. This means there is no recorded test where both parts ran the same workload and produced comparable scores.

The only available benchmark score belongs to the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU. It scored 733 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. That score places it at the 3rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest measured rivals include the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU and Intel Arc Graphics 64EU, both scoring 733 with a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon HD 6470M scores 723, which is 1.4% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M scores 751, which is 2.4% higher.

Without a benchmark score for the NVIDIA N1X 48SM, no exact performance gap can be calculated. The specification sheet suggests a massive advantage for the NVIDIA part: 28.83 TFLOPS of FP32 versus 998.4 GFLOPS, 112.6 GPixel/s pixel rate versus 15.60 GPixel/s, and 900.9 GTexel/s texture rate versus 31.20 GTexel/s. These figures indicate the NVIDIA part would likely outperform the Intel part by a wide margin, but the database does not contain a direct test to confirm this.

The data shows that the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU competes near the bottom of the GPU performance spectrum. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM, by its 50th percentile ranking, sits near the middle of all GPUs. The absence of benchmark data for the NVIDIA part prevents any numerical head-to-head analysis.

Specification Differences

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and the NVIDIA N1X 48SM differ across nearly every specification field.

Process and Physical:

The Intel part uses a 3 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. The NVIDIA part uses a 5 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 382 mm² and an unknown transistor count. The Intel part has a transistor density of 73.3M per mm², while the NVIDIA part has no recorded density.

Clocks:

The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1950 MHz. The NVIDIA part has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. The NVIDIA part also lists a memory clock of 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective, while the Intel part uses system-shared memory.

Memory:

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth.

Compute Units:

The Intel part has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The NVIDIA part has 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The NVIDIA part also includes 48 ray tracing cores and 192 tensor cores, while the Intel part lists none for either.

Rates:

The Intel part produces 15.60 GPixel/s pixel rate, 31.20 GTexel/s texture rate, 998.4 GFLOPS FP32, and 1.997 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The NVIDIA part produces 112.6 GPixel/s pixel rate, 900.9 GTexel/s texture rate, 28.83 TFLOPS FP32, and 28.83 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1).

Power and Interface:

The Intel part has a TDP of 65 W and uses a Ring Bus interface. The NVIDIA part has an unknown TDP, no power connectors, and uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Both are integrated graphics with an IGP slot width.

Display Outputs:

The Intel part has motherboard-dependent display outputs. The NVIDIA part has 1x HDMI.

API Support:

The Intel part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses the Xe-LPG architecture, part of the Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) generation. It is built on a 3 nm TSMC process and uses the Arrow Lake-S chip. The architecture lacks dedicated ray tracing cores and tensor cores. The FP16 rate is half the FP32 rate, indicating a 2:1 ratio. The part has a 65 W TDP and connects via Ring Bus.

The NVIDIA N1X 48SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, part of the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. It is built on a 5 nm TSMC process and uses the GB20B chip. The architecture includes 48 ray tracing cores and 192 tensor cores. The FP16 rate matches the FP32 rate at 28.83 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio. The part uses PCIe 5.0 x16 and has no power connectors, consistent with an integrated design.

The process node difference is notable: 3 nm versus 5 nm, both at TSMC. The Intel die is smaller at 243 mm² versus 382 mm², but the Intel part packs 17,800 million transistors into that smaller space, giving it a density of 73.3M per mm². The NVIDIA transistor count is unknown, so density cannot be calculated.

The memory architecture differs fundamentally. The Intel part relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth dependent on the host system. The NVIDIA part has dedicated 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s. This gives the NVIDIA part a fixed, high-bandwidth memory subsystem, while the Intel part is constrained by the system's memory configuration.

The compute architecture shows a massive scale difference. The NVIDIA part has 24 times more shading units, 24 times more TMUs, and 6 times more ROPs than the Intel part. The NVIDIA part also adds ray tracing and tensor hardware, which the Intel part lacks entirely.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Arc Graphics 32EU wins on measured data availability. The database contains a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733 for this part. It also lists a full set of API support including DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which gives it a defined software feature set. The NVIDIA part has no benchmark scores and lists all APIs as N/A.

Intel Arc Graphics 32EU wins on power efficiency indicators. The Intel part has a 65 W TDP, which is a recorded figure. The NVIDIA part has an unknown TDP. The Intel part also uses a Ring Bus interface, which is typical for integrated graphics on a CPU die, while the NVIDIA part uses PCIe 5.0 x16.

Intel Arc Graphics 32EU wins on process node precision. The 3 nm process with a known transistor count of 17,800 million and a density of 73.3M per mm² provides concrete manufacturing data. The NVIDIA part has an unknown transistor count and no density figure.

NVIDIA N1X 48SM wins on raw compute capability. The specifications show 28.83 TFLOPS of FP32 versus 998.4 GFLOPS for Intel. The pixel rate is 112.6 GPixel/s versus 15.60 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 900.9 GTexel/s versus 31.20 GTexel/s. Every compute metric favors the NVIDIA part by a wide margin.

NVIDIA N1X 48SM wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. The 128 GB of LPDDR5X with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth is a fixed, high-performance configuration. The Intel part uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, which cannot guarantee any specific performance level.

NVIDIA N1X 48SM wins on feature hardware. The 48 ray tracing cores and 192 tensor cores provide dedicated acceleration for ray-traced workloads and AI inference. The Intel part has no such dedicated hardware. The NVIDIA part also has a higher boost clock at 2346 MHz versus 1950 MHz.

NVIDIA N1X 48SM wins on overall percentile ranking. The NVIDIA part sits at the 50th percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel part sits at the 3rd percentile. This ranking indicates the NVIDIA part belongs in the middle of the performance distribution, while the Intel part is near the bottom.