Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER Comparison

Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is an integrated processor graphics solution built for low-power portable devices, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER is a discrete, triple-slot add-in board aimed at high-end desktop workloads. The recorded data shows these two parts occupy opposite ends of the graphics spectrum, with the RTX 4080 SUPER delivering overwhelming performance in every measured benchmark. The Intel part has no individual benchmark entries in the database, so quantitative comparisons rely on the RTX 4080 SUPER’s recorded scores and its percentile placement relative to all GPUs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RTX 4080 SUPER’s benchmark results are extensive and unambiguous. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 6600 points, a figure that reflects strong rasterization throughput under modern DirectX 12 workloads. Geekbench OpenCL returns 219065 points, while Geekbench Vulkan returns 260075 points, indicating that the card handles compute and cross-platform graphics APIs with high efficiency. Passmark DirectX 10, DirectX 11, DirectX 12, and DirectX 9 scores are 193, 301, 134, and 381 respectively; these are lower than the other tests because Passmark’s legacy DirectX tests are not representative of the card’s peak capabilities, yet they still show consistent execution across API generations.

The Passmark G3D score of 34245 and GPU Compute score of 19822 further confirm the RTX 4080 SUPER’s dominance in both graphics and general-purpose compute. Its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 54209, placing it in the 86th percentile of all GPUs in the database. That percentile means it outperforms roughly 86% of all graphics processors tracked, a strong position for a high-end part. In comparison, the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has zero recorded benchmark scores and an average score of 0, with a 50th percentile placement that reflects its absence of data rather than actual performance. The database does not contain head-to-head benchmark entries between these two products, so no direct per-test deltas exist. However, the raw numbers show the RTX 4080 SUPER delivers compute performance in the tens of thousands of points, while the Intel part has no measurable results to compare.

The nearest rivals to the RTX 4080 SUPER provide context for its standing. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 scores 54247 on average, a 0.1% difference, meaning the SUPER is essentially performance-equivalent to the non-SUPER version within measurement noise. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X averages 54828, sitting 1.1% ahead of the RTX 4080 SUPER. The AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB averages 55698, 2.7% ahead, and the AMD Radeon 8060S averages 55757, 2.8% ahead. These deltas are small, all within a few percentage points, which indicates the RTX 4080 SUPER is tightly clustered with other high-end cards. None of these rivals come close to the performance gap between the RTX 4080 SUPER and the Intel integrated solution.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs use completely different manufacturing and design approaches. Intel’s chip, codenamed Twin Lake, uses the Xe-LP architecture built on a 10 nm process at Intel’s foundry. It is part of the HD Graphics-T (Twin Lake) generation. The NVIDIA chip, AD103, uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5 nm process manufactured by TSMC. The transistor counts reflect this gap: Intel does not disclose transistor count or die size, while NVIDIA lists 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 121.1 million per mm². The 5 nm node allows far more logic in the same area.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The Intel part runs at a base clock of 300 MHz with a boost of 1000 MHz, which is typical for a low-power integrated GPU. The RTX 4080 SUPER has a base clock of 2295 MHz and a boost of 2550 MHz. Memory configurations are also polar opposites. The Intel GPU uses system shared memory, with a system-dependent bandwidth, no dedicated VRAM, and no dedicated memory bus width. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1438 MHz or 23 Gbps effective, yielding 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth. That bandwidth alone is several orders of magnitude higher than what a shared-memory IGP can access.

Compute resources scale accordingly. Intel’s GPU has 192 shading units, 12 texture mapping units, and 4 raster output units. It has no dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores. NVIDIA’s part has 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, plus 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores. Pixel rate for Intel is 4.000 GPixel/s and texture rate is 12.00 GTexel/s. The RTX 4080 SUPER achieves 285.6 GPixel/s and 816.0 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance shows the compute delta: Intel delivers 384.0 GFLOPS for FP32 and 768.0 GFLOPS for FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. NVIDIA delivers 52.22 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 with a 1:1 ratio, meaning the RTX 4080 SUPER is over 100 times faster in raw FP32 throughput.

Power and physical design are equally divergent. The Intel part has a 6 W TDP and is an integrated graphics processor, meaning it is soldered onto the motherboard or CPU package with no slot width or power connectors. The RTX 4080 SUPER has a 320 W TDP, requires a triple-slot cooler, uses a single 16-pin power connector, and needs a 700 W suggested power supply. Its physical dimensions are 310 mm in length, 140 mm in height, and 61 mm in width. The bus interface differs too: Intel uses a Ring Bus, while NVIDIA uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER boosts to 2550 MHz, while the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile boosts to 1000 MHz.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each GPU have?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has 736.3 GB/s from its 16 GB GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus. The Intel part uses system shared memory with bandwidth listed as system dependent.

Q: Does the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile support ray tracing?

A: No. The Intel part has no RT cores listed, while the RTX 4080 SUPER includes 80 RT cores.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 54209. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has an average score of 0 with no recorded benchmarks.

Q: What is the difference in shading units?

A: The Intel part has 192 shading units. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 10,240 shading units, which is over 50 times more.

Q: Which GPU has a higher TDP?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has a 320 W TDP. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has a 6 W TDP.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion. The RTX 4080 SUPER is a high-end discrete GPU designed for demanding gaming, rendering, and compute tasks. Its 86th percentile placement, average score of 54209, and massive resource counts (10,240 shading units, 80 RT cores, 736.3 GB/s bandwidth) make it suitable for workloads that require sustained high throughput. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile, with a 6 W TDP and integrated design, is intended for basic display output and light graphics acceleration in portable devices. Its lack of recorded benchmarks means the database cannot confirm any specific performance level, but its hardware specifications (192 shading units, shared memory, no RT cores) indicate it is not designed for heavy 3D workloads.

Users who need to run modern games at high resolutions, perform GPU-accelerated rendering, or use AI inference would select the RTX 4080 SUPER based on its recorded scores. Users who only need a display output for office work, web browsing, or video playback on a low-power laptop would use the Intel integrated part. The gap in average benchmark scores, from 0 to 54209, illustrates the difference in capability, though the Intel score of 0 is due to missing data rather than a literal zero-performance result.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every specification field. The RTX 4080 SUPER uses a 5 nm process at TSMC, while Intel uses a 10 nm process at Intel. Transistor count is 45,900 million for NVIDIA, versus unknown for Intel. Die size is 379 mm² for NVIDIA, unknown for Intel. Base clocks are 2295 MHz versus 300 MHz, and boost clocks are 2550 MHz versus 1000 MHz. Memory size is 16 GB GDDR6X versus system shared. Memory bus width is 256 bit versus system shared. Memory bandwidth is 736.3 GB/s versus system dependent.

Shading units are 10,240 versus 192. TMUs are 320 versus 12. ROPs are 112 versus 4. RT cores are 80 versus none. Tensor cores are 320 versus none. Pixel rate is 285.6 GPixel/s versus 4.000 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 816.0 GTexel/s versus 12.00 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 52.22 TFLOPS versus 384.0 GFLOPS. FP16 performance is 52.22 TFLOPS versus 768.0 GFLOPS. TDP is 320 W versus 6 W. Slot width is triple-slot versus IGP. Power connectors are 1x 16-pin versus none. Suggested PSU is 700 W versus none. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 versus Ring Bus. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.13x DisplayPort 1.4a versus portable device dependent.

DirectX support differs: the RTX 4080 SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1). OpenGL and Vulkan versions match at 4.6 and 1.4 respectively. The RTX 4080 SUPER has physical dimensions of 310 mm length, 140 mm height, and 61 mm width, while the Intel part has no listed dimensions. Production status is end-of-life for NVIDIA and active for Intel. Release dates differ: the RTX 4080 SUPER launched on 2024-01-30, while Intel’s part has a release date of 2024-12-31. The RTX 4080 SUPER has a launch MSRP of 999 USD, which is mentioned once here as the launch MSRP; the Intel part has no listed MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4080 SUPER wins in every category with recorded data. It dominates in raw compute, with FP32 throughput of 52.22 TFLOPS compared to 384.0 GFLOPS. It wins in memory bandwidth, with 736.3 GB/s versus system-dependent shared memory. It wins in texture and pixel processing, with 816.0 GTexel/s and 285.6 GPixel/s versus 12.00 GTexel/s and 4.000 GPixel/s. It has dedicated ray tracing and tensor cores, which the Intel part lacks. Its benchmark scores, from 3DMark Steel Nomad to Passmark G3D, all show strong performance that the Intel part cannot match, since the Intel part has no recorded scores.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile wins in power efficiency and physical integration. Its 6 W TDP allows fanless or passively cooled operation in thin and light devices, whereas the RTX 4080 SUPER requires a 320 W TDP, a triple-slot cooler, and a 700 W power supply. The Intel part uses system shared memory, eliminating the need for separate VRAM and reducing cost complexity. Its Ring Bus interface and lack of power connectors make it suitable for soldered motherboard designs. The Intel part is also listed as active in production, while the RTX 4080 SUPER is end-of-life, meaning the integrated GPU is a current product for new low-power designs.

For use cases, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the choice for gaming at high settings, 3D rendering, video editing with GPU acceleration, and machine learning workloads that leverage tensor cores. The Intel part is the choice for basic desktop tasks, media playback, and light 2D acceleration in portable devices where battery life and thermal limits take priority. The 86th percentile ranking of the RTX 4080 SUPER confirms its position among top-tier GPUs, while the Intel part’s 50th percentile is a placeholder value due to missing benchmark data, not an indication of actual performance. The recorded numbers make the performance hierarchy clear, and the specification differences reinforce that these are not competing products but rather solutions for entirely different segments.