Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the two products compared in this analysis?

A: The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile, an integrated graphics processor from Intel, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106, a discrete graphics card from NVIDIA.

Q: What are the respective architectures and process nodes?

A: The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses the Xe-LP architecture built on Intel's 10 nm process. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 uses the Ada Lovelace architecture built on TSMC's 5 nm process.

Q: How do the memory subsystems differ?

A: The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses System Shared memory, with bandwidth described as System Dependent. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 272.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has a TDP of 6 W and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor). The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 has a TDP of 115 W, is a dual-slot card, uses a 1x 12-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 300 W.

Q: What is the production status of each product?

A: The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is listed as Active. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 is listed as End-of-life.

Q: What are the release dates?

A: The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile was released on 2024-12-31 (with the timestamp indicating January 1, 2025, likely a date encoding nuance). The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 was released on 2024-03-31 (with the timestamp indicating April 1, 2024).

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile wins in power efficiency. Its 6 W TDP is dramatically lower than the NVIDIA card's 115 W, making it suitable for ultra-portable and low-power devices. It also has the advantage of being an IGP, meaning it requires no separate slot or power connectors, and its memory is system shared, simplifying the system design.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 wins in almost every raw performance category. Its FP32 compute of 15.11 TFLOPS is vastly higher than the Intel part's 384.0 GFLOPS. The NVIDIA card also wins decisively in pixel rate (118.1 GPixel/s vs 4.000 GPixel/s) and texture rate (236.2 GTexel/s vs 12.00 GTexel/s). It also offers dedicated ray tracing cores (24) and tensor cores (96), which the Intel part lacks entirely. The NVIDIA card has a much larger memory bandwidth and capacity, and a higher boost clock (2460 MHz vs 1000 MHz).

Architecture Differences

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is based on the Xe-LP architecture, which is Intel's low-power graphics architecture designed for integrated use. It is built on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The chip is called Twin Lake, and it belongs to the HD Graphics-T (Twin Lake) generation. The Intel part has 192 shading units, 12 texture mapping units, and 4 render output units. It has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. Its FP16 performance is 768.0 GFLOPS, which is exactly 2:1 of its FP32 rate, indicating that it does not have dedicated FP16 hardware.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 is based on the Ada Lovelace architecture, a high-performance design from NVIDIA. It is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 22,900 million transistors on a 188 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 121.8M per mm². The chip is AD106. The NVIDIA part has 3072 shading units, 96 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 24 ray tracing cores, and 96 tensor cores. Its FP16 performance is 15.11 TFLOPS, which is 1:1 with its FP32 rate, indicating full-rate FP16 processing. The NVIDIA card uses PCIe 4.0 x8 as its bus interface, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus, reflecting its integrated nature.

Specification Differences

The two products differ in nearly every specification field. The process node is 10 nm for Intel versus 5 nm for NVIDIA. The transistor count is unknown for Intel, while NVIDIA has 22,900 million. The die size is unknown for Intel, while NVIDIA has 188 mm². The base clock is 300 MHz for Intel versus 1830 MHz for NVIDIA. The boost clock is 1000 MHz for Intel versus 2460 MHz for NVIDIA. The memory size is System Shared for Intel versus 8 GB for NVIDIA. The memory type is System Shared for Intel versus GDDR6 for NVIDIA. The bus width is System Shared for Intel versus 128 bit for NVIDIA. The bandwidth is System Dependent for Intel versus 272.0 GB/s for NVIDIA.

The shading units are 192 for Intel versus 3072 for NVIDIA. The TMUs are 12 versus 96. The ROPs are 4 versus 48. The Intel part has no RT cores, while NVIDIA has 24. The Intel part has no tensor cores, while NVIDIA has 96. The pixel rate is 4.000 GPixel/s versus 118.1 GPixel/s. The texture rate is 12.00 GTexel/s versus 236.2 GTexel/s. The FP32 is 384.0 GFLOPS versus 15.11 TFLOPS. The FP16 is 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1) versus 15.11 TFLOPS (1:1). The TDP is 6 W versus 115 W. The slot width is IGP versus Dual-slot. The power connectors are null versus 1x 12-pin. The suggested PSU is null versus 300 W. The bus interface is Ring Bus versus PCIe 4.0 x8. The display outputs are Portable Device Dependent versus 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The DirectX support is 12 (12_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark entries for these two products. The winsA and winsB fields are both zero. However, the specification data provides a clear comparative picture. The most significant differences are in compute throughput and memory bandwidth.

The FP32 performance difference is the largest gap. The NVIDIA card delivers 15.11 TFLOPS, while the Intel part delivers 384.0 GFLOPS. This is a factor of roughly 39.4x in favor of NVIDIA. In practical terms, this means the NVIDIA card can process a vastly larger amount of shader instructions per second. The FP16 comparison is also stark: NVIDIA's 15.11 TFLOPS versus Intel's 768.0 GFLOPS. The NVIDIA card's FP16 rate is identical to its FP32 rate, while Intel's FP16 is only 2x its FP32 rate, indicating different hardware paths for these data types.

The texture rate differential is also enormous. NVIDIA's 236.2 GTexel/s versus Intel's 12.00 GTexel/s is a factor of 19.7x. This affects how quickly textures can be sampled and applied to geometry. The pixel rate differential is even larger at 29.5x, with NVIDIA delivering 118.1 GPixel/s versus Intel's 4.000 GPixel/s. This directly impacts fill rate and resolution capabilities.

Memory bandwidth is another major separator. NVIDIA's 272.0 GB/s versus Intel's System Dependent bandwidth means that the NVIDIA card has predictable, fixed high-bandwidth access, while the Intel part's performance depends entirely on the system's memory configuration. The NVIDIA card also has a fixed 8 GB memory pool, whereas the Intel part shares system memory, which could be a bottleneck.

The clock speeds also differ substantially. The NVIDIA boost clock of 2460 MHz is 2.46x higher than Intel's 1000 MHz boost. The NVIDIA base clock of 1830 MHz is 6.1x higher than Intel's 300 MHz base. These clock differences partially explain the performance gap, but the architectural differences (shading units, TMUs, ROPs) are the dominant factor.

The Intel part has no ray tracing or tensor cores, while the NVIDIA card has 24 RT cores and 96 tensor cores. This is a qualitative capability difference that cannot be bridged by clock speeds or memory. Any workload using ray tracing or tensor operations would simply not run on the Intel part, or would fall back to compute shaders with drastically reduced performance.

The Verdict

The data indicates that these two products serve completely different market segments. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is an integrated processor with a 6 W TDP, designed for low-power mobile devices where energy consumption is the primary constraint. Its performance is limited to 384.0 GFLOPS FP32, with System Shared memory and no dedicated RT or tensor hardware. It uses a Ring Bus interface and has portable-device-dependent display outputs.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 is a discrete, dual-slot graphics card with a 115 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 300 W. It delivers 15.11 TFLOPS FP32, has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with 272.0 GB/s bandwidth, and includes 24 RT cores and 96 tensor cores. It uses PCIe 4.0 x8 and provides 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

The production status also tells a story. The Intel part is Active, while the NVIDIA part is End-of-life, and the NVIDIA card has a listed predecessor (GeForce 30) and successor (GeForce 50). The Intel part has no predecessor or successor listed.

Who should pick which depends entirely on the use case. A system designer building an ultra-low-power mobile device with minimal thermal budget would select the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile. A user needing high-performance gaming, 3D rendering, or GPU compute would select the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106. The benchmark data, while empty of direct head-to-head results, shows no scenario where the Intel part can compete with the NVIDIA card on raw performance. Conversely, the NVIDIA card's power draw and physical size make it unsuitable for the same low-power integrated applications as the Intel part. The choice is dictated by the performance and power envelope requirements, not by any overlapping capabilities.