Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE Comparison

# FAQ

Q: What is the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile based on?

A: The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is built on the Xe-LP architecture, part of the Twin Lake chip, and belongs to the HD Graphics-T (Twin Lake) generation. It is manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel’s foundry.

Q: What memory configuration does the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE use?

A: The RTX 5090 SE uses 24 GB of GDDR7 memory with a 384-bit bus width, delivering 1.34 TB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is 1750 MHz, which translates to 28 Gbps effective.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two GPUs?

A: The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has a TDP of 6 W, while the RTX 5090 SE has a TDP of 500 W. The RTX 5090 SE also requires a 900 W suggested PSU and uses a 1x 16-pin power connector.

Q: Which GPU has higher DirectX support?

A: The RTX 5090 SE supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the physical dimensions of the RTX 5090 SE?

A: The RTX 5090 SE measures 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, making it a dual-slot card. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is an IGP with no separate dimensions listed.

Q: When were these two GPUs released?

A: The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile was released on 2024-12-31, while the RTX 5090 SE was released on 2025-12-31. The RTX 5090 SE has a launch MSRP of 1,499 USD.

# Architecture Differences

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE represent two fundamentally different approaches to graphics processing. The Intel part is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) from the Twin Lake chip, built on the Xe-LP architecture. It uses a 10 nm manufacturing process at Intel’s foundry. In contrast, the RTX 5090 SE is a discrete graphics card from the GeForce 50-series, based on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture and the GB202 chip, produced on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

The transistor counts differ dramatically. The RTX 5090 SE contains 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 122.9M per mm². The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile does not disclose its transistor count or die size in the database, but its integrated nature and 6 W TDP indicate a far smaller footprint.

The execution core configurations are similarly divergent. The Intel GPU has 192 shading units, 12 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 4 render output units (ROPs). The RTX 5090 SE has 14,080 shading units, 440 TMUs, and 160 ROPs. Beyond these traditional units, the RTX 5090 SE includes 110 ray tracing cores and 440 tensor cores, which the Intel GPU lacks entirely.

Clock speeds also set them apart. The Intel GPU runs at a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1000 MHz. The RTX 5090 SE operates at 1740 MHz base and 2377 MHz boost. The memory subsystem differs completely: the Intel GPU uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the RTX 5090 SE has dedicated 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 384-bit bus, achieving 1.34 TB/s.

The bus interface differs as well. The Intel GPU connects via Ring Bus, typical for integrated parts, whereas the RTX 5090 SE uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs also vary: the Intel GPU depends on the portable device, and the RTX 5090 SE provides 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

Power requirements reflect the performance gulf. The Intel GPU consumes just 6 W, while the RTX 5090 SE draws 500 W, with a suggested PSU of 900 W. The RTX 5090 SE uses a dual-slot cooler and a 1x 16-pin power connector. The Intel GPU is an IGP with no separate power connectors.

The API support shows the RTX 5090 SE’s newer feature set. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel GPU supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either GPU, and the head-to-head benchmark list is empty. However, the raw specification data allows for direct computational comparisons across several metrics.

The pixel rate provides one clear point of comparison. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile achieves 4.000 GPixel/s, while the RTX 5090 SE reaches 380.3 GPixel/s. This represents a 95-fold advantage for the NVIDIA part, indicating its ROP count and clock speed deliver vastly higher fill rates.

Texture rate follows the same pattern. The Intel GPU delivers 12.00 GTexel/s, while the RTX 5090 SE outputs 1,045.9 GTexel/s, a difference of roughly 87 times. The 440 TMUs on the RTX 5090 SE, combined with its higher clocks, account for this gap.

The floating-point performance shows the largest divergence. The Intel GPU produces 384.0 GFLOPS in FP32, while the RTX 5090 SE produces 66.94 TFLOPS, which is 66,940 GFLOPS. The NVIDIA part is approximately 174 times faster in FP32 throughput. This reflects the massive shading unit count difference: 14,080 versus 192.

Half-precision performance also differs significantly. The Intel GPU achieves 768.0 GFLOPS in FP16, using a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32. The RTX 5090 SE achieves 66.94 TFLOPS in FP16, using a 1:1 ratio. The NVIDIA part is roughly 87 times faster here as well.

The memory bandwidth comparison is stark. The Intel GPU’s bandwidth is listed as system dependent, with no fixed number, while the RTX 5090 SE has a fixed 1.34 TB/s. This dedicated bandwidth, alongside 24 GB of GDDR7, gives the RTX 5090 SE a fundamental advantage in memory-intensive workloads.

The clock speeds also indicate the performance hierarchy. The Intel GPU’s boost of 1000 MHz is less than half of the RTX 5090 SE’s base clock of 1740 MHz, and less than half of its boost of 2377 MHz. This clock advantage compounds with the core count differences.

# Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field in the database.

Process Node: Intel uses 10 nm; NVIDIA uses 5 nm.

Foundry: Intel uses its own foundry; NVIDIA uses TSMC.

Transistors: Intel lists unknown; NVIDIA lists 92,200 million.

Die Size: Intel lists unknown; NVIDIA lists 750 mm².

Transistor Density: Intel lists null; NVIDIA lists 122.9M / mm².

Base Clock: Intel at 300 MHz; NVIDIA at 1740 MHz.

Boost Clock: Intel at 1000 MHz; NVIDIA at 2377 MHz.

Memory Size: Intel uses system shared; NVIDIA uses 24 GB.

Memory Type: Intel uses system shared; NVIDIA uses GDDR7.

Memory Bus Width: Intel uses system shared; NVIDIA uses 384 bit.

Memory Bandwidth: Intel lists system dependent; NVIDIA lists 1.34 TB/s.

Memory Clock: Intel lists system shared; NVIDIA lists 1750 MHz, 28 Gbps effective.

Shading Units: Intel has 192; NVIDIA has 14,080.

TMUs: Intel has 12; NVIDIA has 440.

ROPs: Intel has 4; NVIDIA has 160.

RT Cores: Intel has null; NVIDIA has 110.

Tensor Cores: Intel has null; NVIDIA has 440.

Pixel Rate: Intel at 4.000 GPixel/s; NVIDIA at 380.3 GPixel/s.

Texture Rate: Intel at 12.00 GTexel/s; NVIDIA at 1,045.9 GTexel/s.

FP32: Intel at 384.0 GFLOPS; NVIDIA at 66.94 TFLOPS.

FP16: Intel at 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1); NVIDIA at 66.94 TFLOPS (1:1).

TDP: Intel at 6 W; NVIDIA at 500 W.

Slot Width: Intel at IGP; NVIDIA at Dual-slot.

Power Connectors: Intel lists null; NVIDIA lists 1x 16-pin.

Suggested PSU: Intel lists null; NVIDIA lists 900 W.

Bus Interface: Intel at Ring Bus; NVIDIA at PCIe 5.0 x16.

Display Outputs: Intel at Portable Device Dependent; NVIDIA at 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

DirectX: Intel at 12 (12_1); NVIDIA at 12 Ultimate (12_2).

OpenGL: Both at 4.6.

Vulkan: Both at 1.4.

Dimensions: Intel lists null; NVIDIA lists 267 mm length, 111 mm height, 40 mm width.

Release Date: Intel at 2024-12-31; NVIDIA at 2025-12-31.

Predecessor: Intel lists null; NVIDIA lists GeForce 40.

Successor: Intel lists null; NVIDIA lists GeForce 60.

Launch MSRP: Intel lists null; NVIDIA lists 1,499 USD.

Production Status: Both are Active.

Series: Intel lists null; NVIDIA lists GeForce 50-series.

Architecture: Intel at Xe-LP; NVIDIA at Blackwell 2.0.

Chip: Intel at Twin Lake; NVIDIA at GB202.

Generation: Intel at HD Graphics-T (Twin Lake); NVIDIA at GeForce 50.

# Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5090 SE dominates in every measurable performance category. In pixel rate, it delivers 380.3 GPixel/s versus 4.000 GPixel/s for the Intel part, a 95x advantage. In texture rate, it achieves 1,045.9 GTexel/s versus 12.00 GTexel/s, an 87x advantage. In FP32, it outputs 66.94 TFLOPS versus 384.0 GFLOPS, a 174x advantage. In FP16, it outputs 66.94 TFLOPS versus 768.0 GFLOPS, an 87x advantage.

The RTX 5090 SE also wins on memory. It has 24 GB of dedicated GDDR7 with 1.34 TB/s bandwidth, whereas the Intel GPU relies on system shared memory with bandwidth dependent on the host system. The RTX 5090 SE’s dedicated memory ensures consistent performance across workloads, while the Intel GPU’s performance varies with system memory speed and availability.

The RTX 5090 SE provides ray tracing cores and tensor cores, which the Intel GPU lacks entirely. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support enables features not available on the Intel GPU’s DirectX 12 (12_1) level. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface offers high bandwidth to the host, while the Intel GPU uses a Ring Bus.

However, the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile wins in power efficiency and form factor. At 6 W, it consumes 494 W less than the RTX 5090 SE’s 500 W. It requires no additional power connectors, no suggested PSU, and occupies no expansion slot, being an IGP. This makes it suitable for low-power portable devices where the RTX 5090 SE cannot be installed.

The Intel GPU also has a release date advantage, appearing in the database on 2024-12-31, one year before the RTX 5090 SE’s 2025-12-31 release. It carries no launch MSRP, while the RTX 5090 SE has a launch MSRP of 1,499 USD.

For workloads that require maximum compute throughput, memory bandwidth, or modern features like ray tracing and tensor operations, the RTX 5090 SE is the clear choice. The data shows its raw numbers dwarf the Intel GPU in every benchmark-relevant metric. The RTX 5090 SE’s 14,080 shading units, 440 TMUs, and 160 ROPs provide the hardware foundation for high-end gaming and professional applications.

For ultra-low-power integrated graphics in mobile or embedded systems, the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile fits a role the RTX 5090 SE cannot fill. Its 6 W TDP and system shared memory make it appropriate for basic display output and light 2D tasks. The Intel GPU’s 192 shading units and 12 TMUs are modest, but they operate within a power envelope that discrete high-end cards cannot approach.

The data shows no competition between these two products in typical use cases. The RTX 5090 SE’s performance class is orders of magnitude above the Intel GPU. The RTX 5090 SE’s 66.94 TFLOPS FP32 output is 174 times the Intel GPU’s 384.0 GFLOPS. The RTX 5090 SE’s 1.34 TB/s bandwidth versus system dependent memory for Intel further separates them.

The RTX 5090 SE’s feature set, including 110 RT cores, 440 tensor cores, and DirectX 12 Ultimate, addresses workloads that the Intel GPU simply cannot handle. The Intel GPU’s strengths lie in its minimal power draw and integration, not in raw performance. Each GPU wins in its intended market segment, with the RTX 5090 SE serving high-performance computing and gaming, while the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile serves ultra-portable, low-power devices.