Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile vs NVIDIA N1X 48SM Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile and NVIDIA N1X 48SM occupy opposite ends of the integrated graphics spectrum, and the benchmark data reflects a stark division of labor. The Intel part is a compact, power-conscious IGP built for Meteor Lake laptops, while the NVIDIA N1X 48SM is a massive Blackwell IGP with desktop-class resources. Based on the recorded specifications, the Intel Arc wins in portability and API compatibility, while the NVIDIA part wins in raw compute, memory bandwidth, and feature set.

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile is a 65 W IGP with 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. Its pixel rate is 28.00 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 56.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput is 1.792 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 3.584 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio. This is a part designed for mainstream laptops where power draw and thermals are constrained, and its numbers confirm that positioning. The 10 nm process node, Intel foundry, and Ring Bus interface all point to a tightly integrated solution rather than a discrete-class part.

The NVIDIA N1X 48SM is a different beast entirely. It carries 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores. Its pixel rate is 112.6 GPixel/s, texture rate is 900.9 GTexel/s, and FP32 throughput reaches 28.83 TFLOPS, with FP16 at the same 28.83 TFLOPS using a 1:1 ratio. The die size is 382 mm² on a 5 nm TSMC process. This is an IGP in name only; the compute resources rival discrete graphics cards. The memory subsystem is equally imposing, with 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth.

In terms of wins, the Intel Arc holds the advantage in software compatibility. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the NVIDIA N1X 48SM reports N/A for all three APIs. That is a decisive win for the Intel part in any workload that relies on established graphics APIs. The NVIDIA part, by contrast, appears to target a proprietary or specialized software stack, which limits its use in conventional gaming and general-purpose GPU compute.

The NVIDIA N1X 48SM wins decisively in every raw performance metric. Its FP32 throughput is roughly 16 times higher than the Intel part. Texture rate is about 16 times higher, and pixel rate is about 4 times higher. The memory bandwidth advantage is also massive, with 273.2 GB/s versus the Intel part’s system-dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA part also has dedicated RT cores and tensor cores, which the Intel part lacks entirely. This makes the NVIDIA IGP the clear choice for ray tracing and AI-accelerated workloads, provided the software stack supports them.

The Intel Arc wins on release timing and production maturity. It launched on 2023-12-13, while the NVIDIA N1X 48SM is dated 2026-05-31. The Intel part is already active in the market, whereas the NVIDIA part is a future product. For current systems, the Intel Arc is the only one of the two that can be deployed today. The NVIDIA part, when it arrives, will bring a generational leap in integrated graphics performance, but it is not yet available.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures, nodes, and design philosophies. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile uses the Xe-LPG architecture, part of the Meteor Lake chip, and is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, built on the GB20B chip, and is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The process node difference alone, 10 nm versus 5 nm, explains a significant portion of the performance gap, as the smaller node allows for higher transistor density and better power efficiency.

The Intel part has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. It has no dedicated RT cores and no tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores. The presence of RT and tensor cores on the NVIDIA part is a structural advantage for ray-traced rendering and machine learning inference, neither of which the Intel IGP can accelerate in hardware. The shading unit count is 12 times higher on the NVIDIA part, which directly translates to the FP32 throughput gap.

Memory architecture differs sharply. The Intel Arc uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bus width and bandwidth. This means its performance is tied to the host laptop’s RAM and memory controller. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has a dedicated 128 GB LPDDR5X pool on a 256-bit bus, delivering a fixed 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA part’s memory clock is 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective data rate. This dedicated, high-bandwidth memory subsystem is a major reason the NVIDIA part can sustain high texture and pixel rates without stalling.

Clock behavior also differs. The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1750 MHz. The NVIDIA part has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. The NVIDIA part runs at a higher base clock and a substantially higher boost clock, which compounds its architectural advantages. The Intel part’s lower clocks are consistent with its lower power envelope of 65 W, while the NVIDIA part’s TDP is listed as unknown, suggesting it may sit higher.

The bus interface differs as well. The Intel part uses a Ring Bus, typical for an integrated GPU tightly coupled to the CPU die. The NVIDIA part uses PCIe 5.0 x16, which is a discrete-class interface even though the slot width is IGP. This suggests the NVIDIA part may be a multi-chip module or a chiplet design that communicates over PCIe. Display outputs also differ: the Intel part is portable-device dependent, while the NVIDIA part lists a single HDMI output.

The NVIDIA part’s die size is 382 mm², which is large for an integrated GPU. The Intel part has no listed die size or transistor count. The NVIDIA part’s foundry is TSMC, while the Intel part uses Intel’s own fabs. The NVIDIA part has no power connectors and a production status of Active, as does the Intel part. The NVIDIA part is part of the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation, while the Intel part belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) generation.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark dataset is empty, so the comparison relies entirely on the recorded specification data. The most striking difference is in FP32 compute. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM delivers 28.83 TFLOPS, which is 16.1 times the Intel Arc’s 1.792 TFLOPS. This is not a marginal lead; it is a full order-of-magnitude gap that positions the NVIDIA part in a completely different performance class.

FP16 performance tells a similar story. The Intel Arc reaches 3.584 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, meaning it halves the FP32 rate. The NVIDIA part sustains 28.83 TFLOPS at FP16 with a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not lose throughput when switching to half precision. This makes the NVIDIA part more efficient for FP16 workloads, such as certain AI inference tasks, and it also gives it an 8.0 times raw advantage over the Intel part in FP16.

Texture rate is another area of massive divergence. The Intel Arc produces 56.00 GTexel/s, while the NVIDIA N1X 48SM produces 900.9 GTexel/s, a 16.1 times difference. Pixel rate is less extreme but still lopsided: 28.00 GPixel/s versus 112.6 GPixel/s, a 4.0 times advantage for NVIDIA. These rates directly affect fill-rate-bound workloads, such as high-resolution texturing and multi-sample anti-aliasing.

Memory bandwidth is where the NVIDIA part’s dedicated pool pays off. The Intel Arc’s bandwidth is system-dependent, meaning it cannot be stated as a fixed number. The NVIDIA part’s 273.2 GB/s is a fixed, high figure that exceeds what most system-shared IGPs can achieve. Even if the Intel part were paired with fast LPDDR5X system memory, the 256-bit bus on the NVIDIA part would likely dominate in bandwidth-bound scenarios.

Clock speeds also favor NVIDIA. The Intel Arc boosts to 1750 MHz, while the NVIDIA part boosts to 2346 MHz, a 34% higher boost clock. Base clocks are 300 MHz versus 741 MHz, a 2.5 times difference. These clock advantages amplify the architectural lead of the NVIDIA part. The NVIDIA part also has 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores, features the Intel part does not list at all, meaning ray tracing and tensor workloads are simply unavailable on the Intel IGP.

The API support is the one category where Intel wins outright. The Intel Arc supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. This means that for any standard game or application using these APIs, the Intel part is the only one of the two that can run it. The NVIDIA part may rely on proprietary or future APIs, but based on the data, it has no compatibility with current graphics standards.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has 28.83 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 16.1 times the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile’s 1.792 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA part also has 6144 shading units versus 512 on the Intel part.

Q: Does the Intel Arc support modern graphics APIs?

A: Yes. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM reports N/A for all three of these APIs.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

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

Q: Does either GPU have dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores?

A: Only the NVIDIA N1X 48SM has them, with 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile lists no RT cores and no tensor cores.

Q: Which GPU is available now?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile released on 2023-12-13 and is marked Active. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has a release date of 2026-05-31, also marked Active, but it is a future product based on the timeline.

Q: What are the clock speeds for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1750 MHz. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile is the only viable choice for any current system that requires standard graphics API support. Its DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility make it usable in existing games and applications, while the NVIDIA N1X 48SM has no listed support for any of these APIs. For a laptop shipping today, the Intel part is the practical option.

The NVIDIA N1X 48SM is the performance leader by every measurable specification. Its FP32 throughput of 28.83 TFLOPS dwarfs the Intel part’s 1.792 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 900.9 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 112.6 GPixel/s are far beyond what the Intel part can produce. The 128 GB memory pool with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, the 48 RT cores, and the 192 tensor cores make it a far more capable platform for compute-heavy, ray-traced, or AI-accelerated workloads, assuming the appropriate software support exists.

The choice comes down to timing and use case. For immediate deployment in a system that must run current software, the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile is the only option that works with standard APIs. For raw performance and future-ready features, the NVIDIA N1X 48SM is the superior part on paper, but its N/A API status and 2026 release date mean it cannot serve as a drop-in replacement today. The data shows two GPUs designed for different moments and different jobs: one for today’s compatibility, one for tomorrow’s compute.