Intel Arc Graphics 64EU vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison scenario. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has a single benchmark entry in the database: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733. This places it at the 3rd percentile among all GPUs, indicating it delivers entry-level performance. The NVIDIA N1 16SM, however, has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, registering an average benchmark score of 0 and holding the 50th percentile position based on its specifications and classification.

Because the NVIDIA N1 16SM lacks any benchmark entries, there are no direct head-to-head measurements available. The database shows zero wins for either product in direct comparisons. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU's nearest rivals provide context for its performance level. It sits exactly level with the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and Intel Arc Graphics 24EU, both scoring 733, representing a 0% delta. It trails the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M by 2.4% (751 versus 733) and leads the AMD Radeon HD 6470M by 1.4% (723 versus 733).

The NVIDIA N1 16SM's theoretical compute capabilities, however, far exceed what the Intel part demonstrates. The N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, which is roughly 4.9 times the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU's 1.946 TFLOPS. In texture processing, the NVIDIA part achieves 300.3 GTexel/s compared to 60.80 GTexel/s for the Intel part, a margin of roughly 4.9 times as well. Pixel throughput shows a narrower gap: the N1 16SM renders 56.30 GPixel/s versus 30.40 GPixel/s for the Intel Arc, a 1.85 times advantage.

The memory subsystem presents the starkest contrast. The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU relies on system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent, meaning its performance is contingent on the host platform's memory configuration rather than a dedicated allocation. The NVIDIA part's memory clock is listed at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective data rate, while the Intel part's memory clock is also system shared.

Clock behavior differs substantially between the two. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU operates at a 300 MHz base clock with a 1900 MHz boost. The NVIDIA N1 16SM runs at a 741 MHz base clock and boosts to 2346 MHz. The NVIDIA part's higher boost clock, combined with its larger shader array, explains its commanding theoretical performance lead.

Shader resources heavily favor the NVIDIA design. The N1 16SM packs 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU offers only 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The NVIDIA part also includes 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, while the Intel part lists no dedicated RT or tensor core counts. This suggests the NVIDIA N1 16SM is designed for workloads that leverage hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI inference, whereas the Intel part lacks those dedicated resources.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the NVIDIA N1 16SM is a substantially more capable processor on paper. Its theoretical FP32 throughput of 9.609 TFLOPS, combined with 2048 shading units and dedicated ray tracing and tensor cores, positions it as a mid-range performer. The 50th percentile classification for the N1 16SM, despite having no recorded benchmark scores, reflects its specification-based standing. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU, with its 3rd percentile ranking and 733 benchmark score, sits firmly in entry-level territory.

For users relying solely on recorded measurements, the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has the only available data point. Its 733 score in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 places it within a narrow band around other low-end parts. It performs essentially identically to the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and 24EU, slightly behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M, and slightly ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 6470M. These deltas are small, ranging from -2.4% to +1.4%.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM, lacking benchmark scores entirely, cannot be directly compared on measured performance. However, the specification sheet paints a clear picture of architectural superiority. The 9.609 TFLOPS FP32 figure, the 273.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, and the presence of hardware ray tracing and tensor acceleration all point to a processor designed for modern gaming and compute tasks. The Intel part's 1.946 TFLOPS and system shared memory limit its ceiling to light workloads.

The data suggests that system builders choosing between these two should base decisions on workload requirements. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU is an integrated graphics solution for Arrow Lake-S desktop processors, offering basic display output and modest 3D acceleration. The NVIDIA N1 16SM, despite also being an IGP, carries Blackwell 2.0 architecture features and a much larger memory pool, making it suitable for more demanding applications.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU wins in scenarios where its integration into the Arrow Lake-S platform provides simplicity. It uses system shared memory, meaning no dedicated VRAM allocation is required, and its 65 W TDP fits within standard desktop power envelopes. Its 3 nm TSMC process node and 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die give it a transistor density of 73.3M per mm², indicating efficient manufacturing. For basic desktop tasks, office productivity, and legacy game titles, the 733 benchmark score shows it can handle entry-level 3D workloads.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM wins decisively in raw compute throughput. Its 9.609 TFLOPS FP32 performance is approximately five times the Intel part's output, which translates to smoother frame rates in modern games and faster processing in compute-heavy applications. The 128 GB LPDDR5X memory pool is particularly advantageous for large datasets, AI model inference, and multitasking with multiple GPU-accelerated applications. The 273.2 GB/s bandwidth ensures the 2048 shading units stay fed during intensive rendering.

The NVIDIA part's 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores give it a clear edge in ray-traced games and machine learning workloads. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU lists no such hardware, meaning it would rely on software fallbacks for these features. The N1 16SM's PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface also provides a high-bandwidth connection to the host system, whereas the Intel part uses a ring bus, which ties its performance to the CPU's integrated fabric.

In terms of display output, the NVIDIA N1 16SM lists a single HDMI connection, making it suitable for a simple single-display setup. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU's display outputs are motherboard dependent, meaning the available ports vary by motherboard design, offering flexibility but not a fixed specification.

Thermal and power characteristics favor the Intel part in one respect: its 65 W TDP is a known quantity. The NVIDIA N1 16SM's TDP is listed as unknown, so system integrators cannot predict its thermal footprint from the database. The NVIDIA part uses no power connectors, suggesting it draws power solely from the motherboard slot, but the actual consumption remains unspecified.

FAQ

Q: What is the recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score for the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU scores 733 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark. This places it at the 3rd percentile among all GPUs in the database.

Q: Does the NVIDIA N1 16SM have any benchmark scores?

A: No. The database records zero benchmark entries for the NVIDIA N1 16SM, with an average benchmark score of 0. Its 50th percentile ranking is based on its specifications, not measured performance.

Q: How does the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It scores identically to the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and Intel Arc Graphics 24EU, both at 733 with a 0% delta. It trails the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M by 2.4% and leads the AMD Radeon HD 6470M by 1.4%.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth and an 8.5 Gbps effective data rate.

Q: Which GPU has higher shader core counts?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs.

Q: What are the process nodes and release dates for these GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU uses a 3 nm TSMC process and was released on 2024-10-23. The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses a 5 nm TSMC process with a release date of 2026-05-31.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU is built on the Xe-LPG architecture, part of the Arc Graphics (Arrow Lake) generation. It uses a 3 nm process node at TSMC with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 73.3M per mm². The chip is designated Arrow Lake-S, and it succeeds the HD Graphics line. Its API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it compatible with modern graphics standards.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, part of the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. It is manufactured on a 5 nm TSMC process with a die size of 382 mm², though its transistor count is listed as unknown. The chip identifier is GB20B. Notably, its API support is listed as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, which may indicate it is designed for a specific platform rather than general-purpose graphics.

Core organization differs significantly. The Intel part has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with no dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, plus 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores. This fourfold increase in shader count and the presence of specialized hardware make the NVIDIA part architecturally more advanced for parallel workloads.

Clock speeds reflect different design priorities. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU runs at a 300 MHz base and 1900 MHz boost. The NVIDIA N1 16SM runs at 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part's higher boost clock, combined with its larger core count, produces its 9.609 TFLOPS FP32 throughput versus the Intel part's 1.946 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA part also lists FP16 performance at 9.609 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the Intel part achieves 3.891 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, indicating different precision handling strategies.

Memory architecture is a defining difference. The Intel part uses system shared memory with no dedicated bus width or bandwidth figures. The NVIDIA part uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective). This dedicated high-bandwidth memory pool is a major advantage for the NVIDIA part in memory-intensive tasks.

The bus interface differs: the Intel part uses a ring bus, while the NVIDIA part uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The NVIDIA part also lists a single HDMI output, while the Intel part's outputs are motherboard dependent. Both are classified as IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a slot width of IGP, meaning neither occupies an expansion slot. The NVIDIA part has no power connectors, while the Intel part's power connector is listed as null. The Intel part's TDP is 65 W, while the NVIDIA part's TDP is unknown.