Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for these two GPUs contains no benchmark results, so the head-to-head comparison must be built from the measured specifications and the derived performance figures the database records. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE shows a decisive advantage in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 performance of 66.94 TFLOPS stands 50.7% above the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350's 44.44 TFLOPS. The same margin appears in FP16 work, where both cards operate at a 1:1 ratio with their FP32 rates, so the RTX 5090 SE again delivers 66.94 TFLOPS against Intel's 44.44 TFLOPS. That is a substantial gap for any workload that relies on shader compute or general-purpose floating-point math.

The RTX 5090 SE also leads in pixel processing, a category where the Intel part is effectively absent. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 records a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, because it is a compute-oriented accelerator with no display outputs and no ROP units listed. The RTX 5090 SE, by contrast, delivers 380.3 GPixel/s, which is a fundamental difference in how these cards are designed. For any rendering pipeline that produces pixels, the NVIDIA card is the only viable option between the two.

Texture throughput tells a different story. The Intel Max 1350 posts 1,388.8 GTexel/s, which is 32.8% higher than the RTX 5090 SE's 1,045.9 GTexel/s. This result follows from the Intel part's massive 896 texture mapping units, more than double the NVIDIA card's 440 TMUs. The Intel accelerator also carries 14,336 shading units against 14,080 on the RTX 5090 SE, a small but real edge in raw ALU count. Yet the NVIDIA card's higher clocks, 2377 MHz boost versus 1550 MHz boost, more than compensate, which explains the FP32 result.

Memory bandwidth is another Intel victory. The Max 1350 accesses its 96 GB HBM2e frame buffer across an 8192-bit bus, producing 2.46 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 5090 SE uses a 384-bit GDDR7 interface and reaches 1.34 TB/s. Intel's bandwidth advantage is 83.6%, a huge margin that matters for data-intensive workloads such as large language model inference or scientific simulation. The NVIDIA card compensates with much lower memory latency characteristics typical of GDDR7, but the database does not record latency figures, so the comparison rests on bandwidth alone.

Ray tracing hardware is nearly even. The Intel part lists 112 RT cores, the NVIDIA card lists 110, so Intel has a 1.8% edge in core count. The RTX 5090 SE, however, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the Intel accelerator only lists DirectX 12 (12_1) and no Vulkan support. That API gap matters more than the one-core difference for actual ray-traced workloads in gaming or professional DXR applications.

The RTX 5090 SE also wins on transistor density and clock speed. Its TSMC 5 nm node packs 122.9 million transistors per square millimeter, versus 78.1M per mm² on Intel's 10 nm process. The boost clock of 2377 MHz is 53.4% higher than Intel's 1550 MHz. These process and clock advantages explain why the NVIDIA card achieves higher FP32 output despite having fewer shading units on paper.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. Intel's Data Center GPU Max 1350 uses the Ponte Vecchio chip, built on Generation 12.5 architecture, and is manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process. The die measures 1280 mm², the largest in this comparison, and houses 100,000 million transistors. That is 8.5% more transistors than the NVIDIA card's 92,200 million, but spread across a die that is 70.7% larger. The result is a lower transistor density of 78.1M per mm², indicating a design optimized for wide parallel compute rather than compact efficiency.

NVIDIA's GeForce RTX 5090 SE uses the GB202 chip, built on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, and is manufactured on TSMC's 5 nm process. The die is 750 mm², still very large by consumer GPU standards, and packs 92,200 million transistors at a density of 122.9M per mm². This 57.4% higher density reflects a more modern fabrication process and a design that prioritizes clock speed and efficiency per watt.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The Intel Max 1350 uses 96 GB of HBM2e on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 2.46 TB/s. This is a data-center-class memory subsystem built for massive working sets. The RTX 5090 SE uses 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 1.34 TB/s. The NVIDIA card has one-quarter the capacity and roughly half the bandwidth, but GDDR7 is far cheaper to implement and allows a dual-slot consumer form factor. The Intel card is an OAM module, which is a server-oriented package with no display outputs, while the RTX 5090 SE is a dual-slot card with 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs.

Shader and fixed-function hardware also differ. Intel fields 14,336 shading units, 896 TMUs, and 112 RT cores, but zero ROPs. NVIDIA fields 14,080 shading units, 440 TMUs, 160 ROPs, and 110 RT cores, plus 440 tensor cores. The Intel part has no tensor core count listed, while NVIDIA's 440 tensor cores are a key feature for AI workloads. The Intel card's lack of ROPs confirms it is not designed for rasterization output, while the NVIDIA card's 160 ROPs enable the 380.3 GPixel/s fill rate.

Power and cooling requirements follow the same split. The Intel Max 1350 has a TDP of 450 W and suggests an 850 W power supply. The RTX 5090 SE has a TDP of 500 W and suggests a 900 W power supply. Both are power-hungry, but the NVIDIA card runs hotter by 50 W while delivering more compute per watt, at least in FP32 terms. The Intel card uses no listed power connectors because it is an OAM module, while the NVIDIA card uses a single 16-pin connector.

Release timing is also distinct. The Intel Max 1350 launched on January 9, 2023, while the RTX 5090 SE has a release date of December 31, 2025. The Intel part is a data center product from the Ponte Vecchio generation, and its successor is listed as H3C Graphics. The NVIDIA card is part of the GeForce 50-series, with its predecessor listed as GeForce 40 and its successor as GeForce 60.

The Verdict

The data points to two completely different products that happen to share the GPU label. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 is a compute accelerator with massive memory capacity and bandwidth, a wide texture pipeline, and no display or pixel output. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE is a consumer-oriented graphics card with high clock speeds, strong FP32 and FP16 compute, full rasterization capability, and modern API support.

For FP32-heavy workloads, the RTX 5090 SE is the clear winner, with 50.7% higher throughput. For memory-bound tasks that need large working sets, the Intel Max 1350 offers 4x the memory capacity and 83.6% more bandwidth. For anything that requires rendering to a screen, the Intel card simply cannot do it, as it has no ROPs and no display outputs. For ray tracing, the NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while Intel only lists DirectX 12 (12_1) and no Vulkan.

The RTX 5090 SE also has a clear efficiency story at the silicon level, with a 57.4% higher transistor density and a 53.4% higher boost clock. The Intel card compensates with a 60.5% larger die and more transistors overall, but that does not translate into higher compute throughput in the recorded figures.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measured specification. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 uses a 10 nm process from Intel, while the RTX 5090 SE uses a 5 nm process from TSMC. Transistor counts are 100,000 million versus 92,200 million, a difference of 7,800 million in Intel's favor. Die size is 1280 mm² versus 750 mm², a 530 mm² difference. Transistor density is 78.1M per mm² versus 122.9M per mm².

Clock speeds differ substantially. Intel's base clock is 750 MHz against NVIDIA's 1740 MHz. Boost clocks are 1550 MHz versus 2377 MHz. Memory clocks are 1200 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective) versus 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective).

Memory configuration is a major split. Intel offers 96 GB of HBM2e on an 8192-bit bus with 2.46 TB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA offers 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 384-bit bus with 1.34 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel card has 14,336 shading units, 896 TMUs, 0 ROPs, and 112 RT cores. The NVIDIA card has 14,080 shading units, 440 TMUs, 160 ROPs, and 110 RT cores. NVIDIA also lists 440 tensor cores, while Intel lists none.

Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for Intel versus 380.3 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate is 1,388.8 GTexel/s versus 1,045.9 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 are 44.44 TFLOPS versus 66.94 TFLOPS. TDP is 450 W versus 500 W. The Intel card is an OAM module with no power connector listed; the NVIDIA card is dual-slot with a 1x 16-pin connector. Suggested PSU is 850 W versus 900 W.

The Intel card has no display outputs; the NVIDIA card has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. API support differs: DirectX 12 (12_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6 for both, and Vulkan is null for Intel versus 1.4 for NVIDIA. The NVIDIA card has dimensions of 267 mm x 111 mm x 40 mm, while Intel's dimensions are not listed.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE delivers 66.94 TFLOPS, which is 50.7% higher than the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350's 44.44 TFLOPS.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The Intel Max 1350 has 96 GB of HBM2e on an 8192-bit bus with 2.46 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 5090 SE has 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 384-bit bus with 1.34 TB/s bandwidth. Intel offers 4x the capacity and 83.6% more bandwidth.

Q: Can the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 output video to a display?

A: No. It has no display outputs, no ROPs, and a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. The RTX 5090 SE has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs and a pixel rate of 380.3 GPixel/s.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each card?

A: The Intel Max 1350 has a TDP of 450 W with a suggested PSU of 850 W. The RTX 5090 SE has a TDP of 500 W with a suggested PSU of 900 W.

Q: Which GPU supports more modern graphics APIs?

A: The RTX 5090 SE supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel Max 1350 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and lists no Vulkan support.

Q: How do the transistor densities compare?

A: The NVIDIA card, built on TSMC 5 nm, has a transistor density of 122.9M per mm², which is 57.4% higher than the Intel card's 78.1M per mm² on Intel 10 nm.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5090 SE wins in every compute-throughput category except texture rate and memory bandwidth. Its FP32 and FP16 performance of 66.94 TFLOPS is 50.7% ahead of Intel. Its pixel rate of 380.3 GPixel/s is an absolute win because Intel has none. Its boost clock of 2377 MHz is 53.4% higher, and its transistor density of 122.9M per mm² is 57.4% higher. It also supports modern APIs with DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, and it has display outputs for actual use as a graphics card.

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 96 GB frame buffer is 4x larger than NVIDIA's 24 GB, and its 2.46 TB/s bandwidth is 83.6% higher. Its texture rate of 1,388.8 GTexel/s is 32.8% ahead of the RTX 5090 SE. It also has more shading units (14,336 versus 14,080), more TMUs (896 versus 440), and slightly more RT cores (112 versus 110). Its die is larger at 1280 mm² versus 750 mm², and it holds more transistors at 100,000 million versus 92,200 million.

For a builder choosing between these two, the decision rests on workload type. Any task that needs to render images, run modern ray tracing, or use Vulkan will require the RTX 5090 SE. Any task that needs to hold massive datasets in GPU memory, such as large-scale AI inference or scientific computing, will benefit from the Intel Max 1350's 96 GB capacity and 2.46 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel card is not a graphics card in the traditional sense, while the NVIDIA card is not built for data-center-scale memory footprints. The data supports both as leaders in their respective domains, but they barely overlap.