Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile vs Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for these two mobile graphics parts. However, the specification sheets and architectural records provide sufficient measurable data to establish a comparative performance profile. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile and the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile share the same system-shared memory configuration and identical base clock frequency of 300 MHz, but diverge sharply in every computational throughput metric.

The most decisive advantage belongs to the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile in raw pixel throughput. Its pixel rate is recorded at 36.80 GPixel/s, which is 2.56 times the 14.40 GPixel/s of the 48EU part. This difference stems from a 2x difference in ROP count, 16 versus 8, combined with a higher boost clock of 2300 MHz versus 1800 MHz. Texture rate follows a similar pattern: the 4 Xe Mobile delivers 73.60 GTexel/s against 43.20 GTexel/s for the 48EU, a 1.70x advantage driven by 32 TMUs versus 24 TMUs and the higher boost clock.

Shader throughput tells the same story. The 4 Xe Mobile computes 2.355 TFLOPS of FP32 arithmetic, while the 48EU Mobile manages 1,382.4 GFLOPS (1.382 TFLOPS). That is a 1.70x lead in single-precision compute. The FP16 figures show a narrower gap: 4.710 TFLOPS versus 2.765 TFLOPS, a 1.70x advantage again, reflecting the identical 2:1 FP16 ratio on both architectures. The consistency of this 1.70x ratio across texture rate and both FP32 and FP16 throughput indicates that the difference is not merely clock-driven but structural, derived from the shading unit count and execution resource allocation.

Clock speed remains a secondary differentiator. Both parts share a 300 MHz base clock, but the boost clock on the 4 Xe Mobile reaches 2300 MHz, which is 500 MHz higher than the 1800 MHz ceiling of the 48EU part. This 27.8% boost advantage compounds the core count difference. The 4 Xe Mobile houses 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs; the 48EU Mobile houses 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The shading unit ratio is 1.33x, but the ROP ratio is 2.00x, which explains why pixel rate leads by a larger margin than texture or shader rates.

There are no wins recorded for either part in the head-to-head benchmark table, as the benchmark array is empty. The database percentile ranking places both at the 50th percentile against all GPUs, and both have an average benchmark score of zero, indicating that no synthetic or real-world workload results have been logged for either product. Consequently, all comparative conclusions in this analysis derive from the fixed hardware specification fields, not from measured application performance.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy within this mobile graphics pairing. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile outperforms the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile across every compute and rasterization metric recorded in the database. The 4 Xe Mobile delivers 2.56x the pixel rate, 1.70x the texture rate, 1.70x the FP32 throughput, and 1.70x the FP16 throughput relative to the 48EU Mobile. It also adds dedicated ray tracing hardware, with 4 RT cores present on the 4 Xe Mobile and none listed for the 48EU part.

The 48EU Mobile does hold one measurable advantage: its TDP is recorded at 28 W, which is 3 W higher than the 25 W TDP of the 4 Xe Mobile. In a strict power-efficiency comparison, the 4 Xe Mobile achieves higher throughput while consuming less power, which means the performance-per-watt ratio favors the 4 Xe Mobile by a margin larger than the raw performance gap. The 48EU Mobile also uses a Ring Bus interface, whereas the 4 Xe Mobile uses the IGP bus interface, but no bandwidth measurements are recorded to quantify any difference.

For a system integrator or user prioritizing raw graphics throughput, ray tracing support, and lower power draw, the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is the only justifiable choice from the recorded data. The 48EU Mobile suits scenarios where the older platform, Meteor Lake, is already in use and the lower boost clock is acceptable for lighter workloads. The 48EU part also retains full DirectX 12 (12_1) support, but the 4 Xe Mobile steps up to DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which enables features such as hardware ray tracing and mesh shaders. The database does not record any benchmark scores or integrated workload results, so no application-specific verdict is possible; the verdict rests entirely on the specification deltas.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs belong to different architectural generations and process nodes. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel. Its chip is Panther Lake, and it belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation. The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile uses the Xe-LPG architecture on a 10 nm process, with the chip codenamed Meteor Lake, belonging to the Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) generation. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the 4 nm process shrink from 10 nm to 3 nm represents a significant density and efficiency improvement for the newer part.

Ray tracing support marks a major architectural divergence. The 4 Xe Mobile includes 4 dedicated RT cores; the 48EU Mobile has no RT cores listed in its specification. This is a functional difference, not merely a numerical one. The 4 Xe Mobile can execute hardware-accelerated ray tracing workloads, while the 48EU Mobile cannot. The DirectX API level confirms this: the 4 Xe Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which mandates ray tracing and mesh shader support, while the 48EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), which does not require those features.

The process node difference also influences the power envelope. The 3 nm part runs at 25 W TDP with a 2300 MHz boost clock, while the 10 nm part runs at 28 W TDP with a 1800 MHz boost clock. The newer architecture achieves a higher clock at lower power, which indicates a substantial efficiency improvement per clock per watt. Both parts use system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, so memory architecture does not differentiate them.

The 48EU Mobile lists a predecessor, HD Graphics-M, while the 4 Xe Mobile has no predecessor recorded. This suggests the 48EU part is a direct evolution from Intel's earlier mobile graphics lineup, whereas the 4 Xe Mobile represents a new product tier within the Panther Lake generation. Neither part lists a successor.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in the following recorded fields, excluding those where both share identical values:

• Process node: 3 nm (4 Xe Mobile) versus 10 nm (48EU Mobile)
• Back-end rendering: 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs (4 Xe Mobile) versus 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, 8 ROPs (48EU Mobile)
• Ray tracing cores: 4 (4 Xe Mobile) versus none (48EU Mobile)
• Boost clock: 2300 MHz (4 Xe Mobile) versus 1800 MHz (48EU Mobile)
• Pixel rate: 36.80 GPixel/s versus 14.40 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 73.60 GTexel/s versus 43.20 GTexel/s
• FP32 throughput: 2.355 TFLOPS versus 1,382.4 GFLOPS
• FP16 throughput: 4.710 TFLOPS versus 2.765 TFLOPS
• TDP: 25 W versus 28 W
• Bus interface: IGP versus Ring Bus
• DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1)
• Architecture generation: Xe3-LPG / Panther Lake versus Xe-LPG / Meteor Lake
• Release date: 2026-01-26 versus 2023-12-13
• Predecessor: none versus HD Graphics-M

Identical fields include base clock at 300 MHz, system-shared memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth (system dependent), OpenGL 4.6 support, Vulkan 1.4 support, IGP slot width, portable-device-dependent display outputs, and active production status. Neither part has a recorded launch MSRP, so no pricing data appears in this analysis.

The 4 Xe Mobile was released approximately two years after the 48EU Mobile, which aligns with the architectural jump from Xe-LPG to Xe3-LPG and the process shrink from 10 nm to 3 nm. The 48EU part has a predecessor, indicating it filled an established slot in Intel's mobile graphics lineup; the 4 Xe Mobile has no predecessor, suggesting it opens a new tier.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has 512 shading units, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has 384 shading units.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile support ray tracing?

A: No. The 48EU Mobile has no RT cores listed in its specification, and its DirectX 12 (12_1) API level does not require ray tracing. The 4 Xe Mobile has 4 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: What is the boost clock difference between the two GPUs?

A: The 4 Xe Mobile boosts to 2300 MHz, while the 48EU Mobile boosts to 1800 MHz, a 500 MHz difference in favor of the 4 Xe Mobile.

Q: How much faster is the 4 Xe Mobile in pixel throughput?

A: The 4 Xe Mobile achieves 36.80 GPixel/s, which is 2.56 times the 14.40 GPixel/s of the 48EU Mobile.

Q: Which GPU consumes more power?

A: The 48EU Mobile has a TDP of 28 W, which is 3 W higher than the 25 W TDP of the 4 Xe Mobile.

Q: What process node does each GPU use?

A: The 4 Xe Mobile uses a 3 nm process, while the 48EU Mobile uses a 10 nm process. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Q: What is the FP32 throughput of each GPU?

A: The 4 Xe Mobile delivers 2.355 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the 48EU Mobile delivers 1,382.4 GFLOPS, which equals 1.382 TFLOPS. The 4 Xe Mobile leads by 1.70x.