Intel Arc Graphics 64EU vs NVIDIA N1X 48SM Comparison

Intel Arc Graphics 64EU and NVIDIA N1X 48SM occupy very different positions in the database. The Intel part is an integrated graphics solution with a single recorded benchmark, while the NVIDIA part is a large integrated processor with no recorded benchmark scores yet. The data shows a clear split: one chip targets general desktop graphics with established APIs, the other targets a specialized compute and memory environment.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU wins in software compatibility and API support. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support means it can run modern gaming and graphics workloads. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A, which indicates it is not designed for conventional graphics APIs. For any task requiring standard graphics rendering, the Intel part has the functional advantage.

The NVIDIA N1X 48SM wins in raw compute throughput and memory capacity. Its FP32 performance of 28.83 TFLOPS is nearly 15 times the 1.946 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU. Its FP16 performance of 28.83 TFLOPS, achieved at a 1:1 ratio, contrasts with the Intel part's 3.891 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. The NVIDIA chip also has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory with a 256-bit bus and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel part uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent.

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU wins in efficiency within its measured context. Its 65 W TDP is a fixed, known quantity, whereas the NVIDIA N1X 48SM has an unknown TDP. The Intel part's base clock of 300 MHz and boost clock of 1900 MHz operate within that 65 W envelope. The NVIDIA chip's base clock of 741 MHz and boost clock of 2346 MHz suggest higher power consumption, but without a TDP figure, the database cannot confirm this.

The NVIDIA N1X 48SM wins in pixel and texture throughput. Its pixel rate of 112.6 GPixel/s is 3.7 times the Intel part's 30.40 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 900.9 GTexel/s is 14.8 times the Intel part's 60.80 GTexel/s. These figures reflect the NVIDIA chip's larger execution resources: 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, and 48 ROPs versus 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs on the Intel part.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU uses the Xe-LPG architecture on the Arrow Lake-S chip, fabricated on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The die size is 243 mm² with 17,800 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 73.3 million per mm². The NVIDIA N1X 48SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture on the GB20B chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. Its die size is 382 mm², but its transistor count is listed as unknown, so no density comparison is possible.

The Intel part integrates its graphics into the Arrow Lake-S package, using a Ring Bus interface. The NVIDIA part connects via PCIe 5.0 x16, which is a discrete-style interface despite being an IGP. This difference matters for system integration: the Intel part shares memory with the CPU, while the NVIDIA part has its own dedicated 128 GB LPDDR5X pool.

The NVIDIA N1X 48SM includes 48 ray tracing cores and 192 tensor cores. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU lists no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. This is a structural difference, not just a performance gap. The NVIDIA chip has dedicated hardware for ray tracing and tensor operations, while the Intel part has none listed in the database.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The Intel part uses system shared memory with a system dependent bus width and bandwidth. The NVIDIA part has a fixed 128 GB capacity, LPDDR5X type, 256-bit bus width, and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock for the NVIDIA part is 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective data rate. The Intel part's memory clock is also listed as system shared, meaning it depends on the host platform.

The API support difference is stark. The Intel part lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part lists N/A for all three. This indicates the NVIDIA N1X 48SM is not intended for standard graphics API workloads, despite having substantial compute resources.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has 6144 shading units, while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has 512. This is a 12-fold difference in raw shader count.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 48SM provides 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth through a 256-bit LPDDR5X interface with 128 GB capacity. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU uses system shared memory, so its bandwidth is system dependent and not fixed in the database.

Q: Does the Intel part support ray tracing?

A: The database lists no ray tracing cores for the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has 48 ray tracing cores. However, the Intel part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes ray tracing APIs, so software-level ray tracing may be possible.

Q: Which chip has a higher boost clock?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 48SM boosts to 2346 MHz, while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU boosts to 1900 MHz. The NVIDIA chip's base clock of 741 MHz is also higher than the Intel part's 300 MHz base clock.

Q: What is the release timeline?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU was released on October 23, 2024. The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has a release date of May 31, 2026. Both are listed as active production status.

Q: Which chip has tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has 192 tensor cores. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU lists no tensor cores in the database.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every measurable specification. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU uses a 3 nm process, while the NVIDIA N1X 48SM uses 5 nm. The Intel die is 243 mm² versus the NVIDIA die at 382 mm². The Intel part has 17,800 million transistors, while the NVIDIA part's transistor count is unknown.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The Intel part runs at 300 MHz base and 1900 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part runs at 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost. The NVIDIA chip also lists a memory clock of 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective, while the Intel part's memory clock is system shared.

Memory specifications are completely different. The Intel part uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA part has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Execution resources differ by an order of magnitude. The Intel part has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The NVIDIA part has 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The NVIDIA part also has 48 ray tracing cores and 192 tensor cores, while the Intel part has neither.

Rates and throughputs follow the resource gap. The Intel part delivers 30.40 GPixel/s and 60.80 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA part delivers 112.6 GPixel/s and 900.9 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1.946 TFLOPS for Intel versus 28.83 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16 performance is 3.891 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio for Intel versus 28.83 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio for NVIDIA.

Power and interface differ. The Intel part has a 65 W TDP, while the NVIDIA part's TDP is unknown. The Intel part uses a Ring Bus interface, while the NVIDIA part uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The NVIDIA part has one HDMI output, while the Intel part's display outputs are motherboard dependent. The NVIDIA part has no power connectors, while the Intel part lists none.

The release dates are nearly two years apart. The Intel part launched October 23, 2024, and the NVIDIA part is slated for May 31, 2026. The Intel part's predecessor is HD Graphics, while the NVIDIA part has no listed predecessor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single benchmark for the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 with a score of 733. This places the chip in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and Intel Arc Graphics 24EU, both with an identical average score of 733 and a delta of 0. The AMD Radeon HD 6470M scores 723, which is 1.4 percent lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M scores 751, which is 2.4 percent higher than the Intel part.

The NVIDIA N1X 48SM has no recorded benchmarks in the database. Its average benchmark score is 0, and its percentile versus all GPUs is 50, which is the median position by default. There are no nearest rivals listed for this part. This means the head-to-head comparison relies entirely on the Intel part's measured score and the NVIDIA part's specification sheet.

The Intel part's 733 score in Steel Nomad DX12 indicates modest performance, sitting at the 3rd percentile. The nearest rival data confirms this: the closest competitor, the GT 415M, is only 2.4 percent faster. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and 24EU match the 733 score exactly, showing that the 64EU variant does not provide a measurable advantage over its smaller siblings in this specific test.

Without a benchmark for the NVIDIA N1X 48SM, the database cannot confirm its real-world performance. The specification sheet suggests very high throughput, but the absence of a recorded score means no direct comparison is possible. The 50th percentile ranking is a placeholder, not a measured result.

The largest wins for the Intel part are in API support and known power draw. It has functional DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support, while the NVIDIA part has N/A for all three. Its 65 W TDP is a fixed number, while the NVIDIA part's TDP is unknown. These are qualitative advantages that do not appear in benchmark scores.

The largest wins for the NVIDIA part are in every computational metric. Its FP32 performance of 28.83 TFLOPS exceeds the Intel part's 1.946 TFLOPS by a factor of 14.8. Its texture rate of 900.9 GTexel/s exceeds the Intel part's 60.80 GTexel/s by a factor of 14.8. Its pixel rate of 112.6 GPixel/s exceeds the Intel part's 30.40 GPixel/s by a factor of 3.7. Its memory bandwidth of 273.2 GB/s is fixed, while the Intel part's bandwidth is system dependent.

The memory capacity difference is also significant. The NVIDIA part has 128 GB of dedicated LPDDR5X memory, while the Intel part uses system shared memory with no fixed capacity. This means the NVIDIA part can hold larger datasets locally without relying on system RAM.

The Verdict

The data indicates two different design philosophies. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU is a conventional integrated GPU for Arrow Lake-S systems. It supports standard graphics APIs, has a known 65 W TDP, and delivers a measurable 733 score in Steel Nomad DX12. Its 3rd percentile ranking places it near the bottom of the database, but it functions as a general-purpose graphics solution.

The NVIDIA N1X 48SM is a compute-oriented IGP with a massive memory pool and high throughput figures. Its lack of DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support suggests it is not intended for conventional graphics workloads. Its unknown TDP and absent benchmarks mean the database cannot confirm its real-world behavior.

Users with standard desktop graphics needs should consider the Intel part because it has working API support and a known power envelope. Users who need large memory capacity and high FP32 throughput, such as for compute tasks, should consider the NVIDIA part based on its specification sheet, but they should note the absence of measured performance data. The 14.8-fold FP32 advantage and 128 GB memory capacity are substantial on paper, yet the lack of benchmark confirmation leaves that advantage unverified. The Intel part, despite its low percentile, has the advantage of a recorded score and functional graphics APIs.