Intel Arc Graphics 64EU vs NVIDIA Rubin GPU Comparison

Intel Arc Graphics 64EU is an integrated graphics solution built on the Xe-LPG architecture, designed for Arrow Lake-S desktop processors. NVIDIA Rubin GPU is a server-class accelerator based on the Rubin architecture and the GR100 chip, intended for high-performance computing. The database records no shared benchmark results between these two parts, and their nearest rival comparisons are entirely separate. The Intel part holds a 3rd percentile ranking among all GPUs, while the NVIDIA part sits at the 50th percentile, reflecting their vastly different performance tiers. This analysis relies exclusively on recorded specifications and available benchmark data.

The Verdict

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU is an integrated GPU with a 65 W TDP, a 3 nm TSMC process, and 512 shading units. Its recorded benchmark score comes from a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 run, producing 733 points. This places it in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs, which indicates entry-level integrated graphics performance. The nearest rivals in the database are Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and Intel Arc Graphics 24EU, both scoring 733 points with a 0% delta, meaning the 64EU version delivers identical measured performance to those lower-configuration parts in that specific test. AMD Radeon HD 6470M scores 723 points, which is 1.4% lower, and NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M scores 751 points, which is 2.4% higher. These deltas show that the Arc 64EU sits in a narrow performance band around older discrete mobile GPUs.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU is a different class entirely. It has a 2300 W TDP, a 3 nm TSMC process, 28,672 shading units, and 896 tensor cores. Its memory subsystem uses 288 GB of HBM4 across a 16384-bit bus, delivering 22.1 TB/s of bandwidth. The database lists no benchmark scores for this part, and its average benchmark score is recorded as 0. Its percentile ranking of 50 is a placeholder value, not a measured result. The Rubin GPU has no nearest rivals listed, so no direct comparisons exist in the database. This part targets server workloads, not consumer graphics, and its specifications indicate extreme compute capacity.

Who should pick which? For desktop systems with Arrow Lake-S processors, the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU serves as the built-in display output and basic rendering solution. Its 733-point Steel Nomad score confirms it handles light graphics tasks, but its 3rd percentile ranking shows it is not suited for demanding games or professional rendering. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU, despite lacking benchmark data, is designed for server deployments where its 130.0 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 22.1 TB/s bandwidth address large-scale compute problems. The data does not support comparing these two for the same workload; they occupy separate market segments.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU uses the Xe-LPG architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm TSMC process. The chip is Arrow Lake-S, and the generation is listed as Arc Graphics (Arrow Lake). The GPU has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. Its transistor count is 17,800 million on a 243 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 73.3 million per mm². The base clock is 300 MHz with a boost clock of 1900 MHz. Memory is system shared, meaning the GPU accesses main system memory rather than dedicated VRAM. The bus interface is Ring Bus, and display outputs depend on the motherboard. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU uses the Rubin architecture on the GR100 chip, also manufactured on a 3 nm TSMC process. Its die size is 1456 mm² with 336,000 million transistors, producing a transistor density of 230.8 million per mm². The base clock is 700 MHz with a boost clock of 2267 MHz. Memory is 288 GB of HBM4 with a 16384-bit bus width and 22.1 TB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is 2695 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective data rate. It has 28,672 shading units, 896 texture mapping units, and only 24 raster output units. Tensor cores number 896. The bus interface is PCIe 6.0 x16, and it is a SXM Module with no display outputs. API support is listed as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating this is a compute-focused accelerator rather than a graphics card.

The architectural split is clear. Intel builds a low-power integrated GPU for consumer processors, while NVIDIA builds a massive server accelerator. The Rubin GPU's shading unit count is 56 times higher than the Intel part, and its die size is nearly six times larger. The Intel GPU relies on system memory, while the Rubin GPU has dedicated HBM4 with a 16384-bit bus. The Intel part has display outputs and full graphics API support, while the Rubin GPU has no display outputs and no graphics API support. These are fundamentally different products sharing only the 3 nm TSMC process node.

FAQ

Q: What is the performance difference between the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU and NVIDIA Rubin GPU?

A: The database contains no head-to-head benchmarks between these two parts. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has one recorded score of 733 points in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has no recorded benchmark scores, so direct performance comparison is impossible from the data.

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

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU scores 733 points, identical to the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and Intel Arc Graphics 24EU, both with a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon HD 6470M scores 723 points, 1.4% lower, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M scores 751 points, 2.4% higher.

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs use?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU uses 288 GB of HBM4 memory with a 16384-bit bus width and 22.1 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has a TDP of 65 W. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has a TDP of 2300 W, with a suggested power supply of 2700 W.

Q: Which GPU supports graphics APIs?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating no graphics API support.

Q: What are the release dates for these products?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has a release date of October 23, 2024. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has a release date of December 31, 2025.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has 512 shading units, while the NVIDIA Rubin GPU has 28,672, a 56-fold difference. Texture mapping units number 32 on Intel and 896 on NVIDIA. Raster output units are 16 on Intel and 24 on NVIDIA. Tensor cores are absent on the Intel part and number 896 on the NVIDIA part. The Intel GPU has no dedicated RT cores listed, and the NVIDIA GPU also has no RT cores listed.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The Intel base clock is 300 MHz with a boost of 1900 MHz. The NVIDIA base clock is 700 MHz with a boost of 2267 MHz. Memory clocks are listed as system shared for Intel and 2695 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective for NVIDIA. The memory bus is system shared on Intel and 16384 bit on NVIDIA. Memory size is system shared on Intel and 288 GB on NVIDIA. Memory type is system shared on Intel and HBM4 on NVIDIA. Bandwidth is system dependent on Intel and 22.1 TB/s on NVIDIA.

Compute rates show the performance gap. The Intel pixel rate is 30.40 GPixel/s, while NVIDIA achieves 54.41 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 60.80 GTexel/s on Intel and 2,031.2 GTexel/s on NVIDIA. FP32 performance is 1.946 TFLOPS on Intel and 130.0 TFLOPS on NVIDIA. FP16 performance is 3.891 TFLOPS (2:1) on Intel and 260.0 TFLOPS (2:1) on NVIDIA. The NVIDIA part delivers 66.8 times the FP32 throughput of the Intel part.

Physical attributes differ as well. The Intel die is 243 mm² with 17,800 million transistors, while the NVIDIA die is 1456 mm² with 336,000 million transistors. Transistor density is 73.3 million per mm² on Intel and 230.8 million per mm² on NVIDIA. Power consumption ranges from 65 W on Intel to 2300 W on NVIDIA. Slot width is IGP for Intel and SXM Module for NVIDIA. Bus interface is Ring Bus for Intel and PCIe 6.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are motherboard dependent for Intel and none for NVIDIA.

The production status for both is Active. The Intel part has a predecessor of HD Graphics, while the NVIDIA part has a predecessor of Server Blackwell. Neither has a successor listed. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records zero head-to-head benchmark entries between the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU and the NVIDIA Rubin GPU. The winsA and winsB fields are both 0, confirming that no direct comparison exists. This is expected because the two products target different market segments: one is an integrated consumer GPU, the other is a server accelerator with no display outputs.

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has its own benchmark result. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 733 points. This score matches the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and Intel Arc Graphics 24EU exactly, with a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon HD 6470M trails by 1.4% with 723 points, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M leads by 2.4% with 751 points. These deltas indicate that the Arc 64EU performs at the level of low-end mobile GPUs from over a decade ago, based on the nearest rival data.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has no benchmark scores in the database. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and its percentile of 50 is not derived from any measured performance. Without recorded results, the database cannot place this part relative to other server accelerators. The specification data, however, shows a device with 130.0 TFLOPS FP32 and 22.1 TB/s memory bandwidth, which would place it far above any consumer GPU, but no benchmark confirms this.

Given the absence of shared benchmarks, the largest wins each way cannot be enumerated from head-to-head data. The available numbers come from each part's own nearest rivals. For Intel, the 733-point score is 1.4% above the AMD Radeon HD 6470M and 2.4% below the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M. For NVIDIA, no rival comparisons exist. The recorded data shows no overlap in performance measurement.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU wins in scenarios requiring integrated graphics with low power consumption. Its 65 W TDP fits within standard desktop processor power envelopes, and its system shared memory eliminates the need for dedicated VRAM. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733 points demonstrates functional DirectX 12 Ultimate support, which qualifies it for basic rendering tasks and light gaming. Its 3rd percentile ranking, however, shows that it sits near the bottom of all GPUs in the database. The 0% delta against the 32EU and 24EU variants suggests that the 64EU configuration does not provide additional measured performance in the Steel Nomad test, possibly due to system memory bandwidth limitations.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU wins in server and compute environments. Its 28,672 shading units and 896 tensor cores provide massive parallel compute capacity. The 288 GB HBM4 memory with 22.1 TB/s bandwidth supports large datasets that would not fit in the system shared memory of the Intel part. The 130.0 TFLOPS FP32 and 260.0 TFLOPS FP16 rates indicate high-throughput numerical workloads. The 2300 W TDP and suggested 2700 W power supply confirm this is a data center component, not a desktop part. The lack of display outputs and graphics API support means it is not intended for rendering to a screen.

The Intel part wins for motherboard-integrated graphics in Arrow Lake-S systems. Its Ring Bus interface and motherboard dependent display outputs make it suitable for office productivity, video playback, and casual gaming. The database shows no tensor cores, so AI acceleration is not a strength. The NVIDIA part wins for AI training, scientific simulation, and large-scale data processing, where its tensor cores and HBM4 memory are directly relevant. Neither part competes for the other's primary use case, and the benchmark data confirms this separation.