Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile vs NVIDIA RTX A400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile and the NVIDIA RTX A400. The Intel part has no benchmark entries, no average score, and no percentile ranking beyond its placement at the 50th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The NVIDIA RTX A400, by contrast, has a full set of nine recorded benchmark scores and an average benchmark score of 6078.

The RTX A400's strongest recorded results appear in compute-oriented workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score reaches 22844, and its Geekbench Vulkan score reaches 22237. These two results sit far above its Passmark scores, which range from 27 to 899 depending on the workload. The Passmark G3D score of 5983 and the Passmark G2D score of 899 represent the card's strongest DirectX-era and 2D results respectively. The Passmark GPU compute score of 2557 sits between those two figures.

Since the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has no benchmark data in the database, the head-to-head comparison relies entirely on architectural specifications and the RTX A400's recorded performance against its nearest rivals. The RTX A400's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 with an average score of 6077 and a delta of 0 percent, the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 with 6049 and a delta of 0.5 percent, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 with 6117 and a delta of -0.6 percent, and the AMD Radeon 760M with 6019 and a delta of 1 percent. These deltas indicate the RTX A400 performs within 1 percent of all four rivals, a tightly clustered group.

The absence of Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile benchmark data means no win count can be assigned to either part. The database records winsA as 0 and winsB as 0, reflecting the lack of direct comparison results. The Intel part's percentile placement at 50 percent of all GPUs serves as its only positional reference, while the RTX A400's 35th percentile placement provides a lower overall ranking despite having measurable scores.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A400 demonstrates clear strengths in measurable workloads based on its recorded benchmark scores. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 22844 indicates strong general-purpose compute performance, and its Geekbench Vulkan score of 22237 shows robust graphics API throughput. These two figures dominate its own Passmark results, suggesting the card's architecture favors compute-heavy and modern API workloads over legacy DirectX paths. The Passmark DirectX 9 score of 87 far exceeds the DirectX 10 score of 32, the DirectX 11 score of 37, and the DirectX 12 score of 27, which indicates the RTX A400's strongest legacy performance comes from older DirectX 9 titles rather than more recent API versions.

The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has no recorded benchmark scores, so its wins cannot be quantified from the database. Its specifications, however, suggest different strengths. The Intel part uses a 3 nm process node compared to the RTX A400's 8 nm node, which implies a more modern manufacturing approach. The Intel chip carries 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units, while the RTX A400 carries 768 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The Intel part's texture rate of 73.60 GTexel/s exceeds the RTX A400's 42.29 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate of 36.80 GPixel/s exceeds the RTX A400's 28.19 GPixel/s. These fillrate advantages indicate the Intel part could excel in texture-heavy and pixel-bound scenes, despite having fewer shading units.

The RTX A400's FP32 throughput of 2.706 TFLOPS exceeds the Intel part's 2.355 TFLOPS, giving NVIDIA the raw shader compute advantage. The RTX A400 also carries 6 ray tracing cores and 24 tensor cores, while the Intel part carries 4 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The RTX A400's FP16 performance matches its FP32 at 2.706 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, whereas the Intel part reaches 4.710 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, indicating the Intel architecture trades shader precision for higher half-precision throughput.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses the Xe3-LPG architecture built on a 3 nm process at Intel's foundry, with the Panther Lake chip. The NVIDIA RTX A400 uses the Ampere architecture built on an 8 nm process at Samsung, with the GA107 chip. The process node difference represents a significant generational gap in manufacturing technology, though the database does not record transistor counts or die size for the Intel part.

The RTX A400's GA107 chip contains 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, with a transistor density of 43.5 million per mm². The Intel part's transistor count and die size remain unknown in the database. The RTX A400 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel part uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth and no dedicated memory bus. The RTX A400's memory clock runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective speed.

The shading architectures differ in unit counts. The Intel part has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The RTX A400 has 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Intel part's higher TMU count and identical ROP count give it fillrate advantages, as shown in its 73.60 GTexel/s texture rate and 36.80 GPixel/s pixel rate versus the RTX A400's 42.29 GTexel/s and 28.19 GPixel/s. The RTX A400's higher shading unit count gives it the FP32 edge at 2.706 TFLOPS versus 2.355 TFLOPS.

Ray tracing and tensor capabilities separate the parts clearly. The RTX A400 includes 6 ray tracing cores and 24 tensor cores, while the Intel part includes 4 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The RTX A400's FP16 throughput equals its FP32 at 2.706 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, reflecting Ampere's design. The Intel part's FP16 reaches 4.710 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, indicating a different precision strategy.

Power and physical characteristics also differ. The Intel part draws 25 W and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors and a portable-device-dependent display output. The RTX A400 draws 50 W, uses a single-slot form factor, has no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W power supply. The RTX A400 measures 163 mm in length and 69 mm in height, while the Intel part's dimensions remain unrecorded. The RTX A400 connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Intel part uses an IGP bus interface.

Both parts support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so their API feature sets match. The RTX A400 offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the Intel part's display outputs depend on the portable device implementation. The RTX A400 released on 2024-04-15 and lists the Quadro Turing as its predecessor and Workstation Ada as its successor. The Intel part released on 2026-01-26 and lists no predecessor or successor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A400 delivers 2.706 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile delivers 2.355 TFLOPS. The RTX A400 leads by 0.351 TFLOPS.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in texture and pixel fillrates?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile leads in both metrics, with 73.60 GTexel/s texture rate and 36.80 GPixel/s pixel rate. The NVIDIA RTX A400 records 42.29 GTexel/s and 28.19 GPixel/s respectively.

Q: What memory configurations do the two GPUs use?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A400 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A400 includes 6 ray tracing cores, while the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile includes 4 ray tracing cores. The RTX A400 also adds 24 tensor cores, which the Intel part lacks entirely.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile draws 25 W as an integrated graphics processor. The NVIDIA RTX A400 draws 50 W, uses a single-slot design, and suggests a 250 W power supply.

Q: How do the benchmark scores for the RTX A400 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX A400's average score of 6078 sits within 1 percent of its nearest rivals. It is 0.5 percent ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro P2000, 1 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon 760M, 0 percent from the NVIDIA GeForce MX230, and 0.6 percent behind the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile | NVIDIA RTX A400 |

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

| Chip | Panther Lake | GA107 |

| Architecture | Xe3-LPG | Ampere |

| Generation | Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) | Workstation Ampere (Ax000) |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | Samsung |

| Transistors | unknown | 8,700 million |

| Die Size | unknown | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | null | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 300 MHz | 1417 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2300 MHz | 1762 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 96.00 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | System Shared | 1500 MHz 12 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 512 | 768 |

| TMUs | 32 | 24 |

| ROPs | 16 | 16 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 4 | 6 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 36.80 GPixel/s | 28.19 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 73.60 GTexel/s | 42.29 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.355 TFLOPS | 2.706 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 4.710 TFLOPS (2:1) | 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 25 W | 50 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | null | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | IGP | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Dimensions | null | 163 mm 6.4 inches length, 69 mm 2.7 inches height |

| Release Date | 2026-01-26 | 2024-04-15 |

| Predecessor | null | Quadro Turing |

| Successor | null | Workstation Ada |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 50 | 35 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 0 | 6078 |