Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a one-sided comparison between these two mobile graphics solutions. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile holds every benchmark win in the database, with the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile posting no wins in any recorded test. The Intel part has no individual benchmark scores recorded, while the NVIDIA part has a full set of eight benchmark results across multiple generations of DirectX and compute workloads.

The largest gap appears in the PassMark G3D test, which measures general 3D graphics performance. The RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 11,664 points. This result places it in the same performance band as the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2, which shows an average score of 8,743 with a 0% delta, along with the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 at 8,686 points and a 0.7% delta. The RTX 3050 A Mobile also leads the AMD Radeon R9 M265X, which scores 8,851 points with a -1.2% delta, and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 at 8,863 points with a -1.3% delta. The Intel Iris Xe has no comparable score in this test, so its performance relative to these rivals cannot be quantified from the database.

In the PassMark DirectX 9 test, the RTX 3050 A Mobile records 152 points. DirectX 10 shows 61 points, DirectX 11 shows 94 points, and DirectX 12 shows 55 points. The DirectX 12 result is notable because the RTX 3050 A Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, while the Intel part supports DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1. The lower DirectX 12 score relative to DirectX 11 suggests that the newer API does not consistently produce higher frame rates in this particular benchmark suite.

Compute performance follows a similar pattern. The RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 4,419 points in the PassMark GPU Compute test and 52,998 points in Geekbench OpenCL. These results reflect the NVIDIA part's raw compute resources: 1,792 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs. The database records no compute benchmark scores for the Intel part, so direct comparison of compute throughput is limited to the specification-level differences.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile also shows a significant advantage in memory bandwidth. The database lists 192.0 GB/s for the NVIDIA part with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus. The Intel part uses system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. This architectural difference explains why the NVIDIA part can sustain higher fill rates in memory-intensive workloads.

Pixel and texture rates reinforce the NVIDIA advantage. The RTX 3050 A Mobile delivers 42.98 GPixel/s and 75.21 GTexel/s. The Intel Iris Xe delivers 29.00 GPixel/s and 58.00 GTexel/s. These figures translate directly into the benchmark gap observed in the G3D test, where the NVIDIA part outperforms its nearest rivals by small margins and leaves the Intel part without a recorded score.

The Verdict

The database shows that the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile is the clear performance leader in every measured category. Its average benchmark score of 8,746 places it at the 44th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile sits at the 50th percentile but has an average benchmark score of 0 due to the absence of recorded test results. This discrepancy means the Intel part's percentile ranking does not reflect measured performance, only its position in the product lineup.

Buyers who need discrete-class graphics performance should select the RTX 3050 A Mobile. Its benchmark scores confirm it can handle DirectX 9 through DirectX 12 workloads, with the G3D score of 11,664 indicating solid general 3D rendering capability. The part also includes 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the Intel Iris Xe. These hardware blocks enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-based features, which the Intel part cannot provide.

The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile suits systems where power consumption and integration matter more than raw performance. Its 15 W TDP compared to 45 W TDP for the NVIDIA part means it fits into thinner, lighter laptops without discrete cooling solutions. The Intel part also uses system-shared memory, eliminating the need for dedicated VRAM modules. This configuration reduces system cost and complexity, though the database does not include pricing information.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile is marked end-of-life in the database, while the Intel part remains active. The NVIDIA successor is listed as the GeForce 20 Mobile, which is the predecessor of the RTX 30-series. This production status suggests the RTX 3050 A Mobile may be phased out, but its benchmark performance remains the reference point for this comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers and use fundamentally different architectures. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile is built on Raptor Lake silicon using Intel's Generation 12.2 architecture, produced on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundries. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the GA106 chip with Ampere architecture, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung.

The NVIDIA chip is substantially larger and more complex. The database lists 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 43.5 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel chip has no transistor count or die size recorded. The NVIDIA part uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus interface designed for integration with Intel processors.

Memory architecture separates these parts completely. The Intel Iris Xe uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth figure. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA memory clock is listed at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective speed. The Intel memory clock is listed as system shared.

Compute resources differ by a wide margin. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1,792 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. It additionally includes 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores. The Intel Iris Xe has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, with no ray tracing or tensor cores listed. This explains the FP32 throughput difference: 4.813 TFLOPS for the NVIDIA part versus 1.856 TFLOPS for the Intel part.

FP16 performance also diverges in implementation. The RTX 3050 A Mobile delivers 4.813 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not split FP16 work across the shader units. The Intel Iris Xe delivers 3.712 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, meaning it processes two FP16 operations per clock per shader. The Intel part's FP16 advantage relative to its FP32 is a design choice, but the NVIDIA part still delivers more absolute FP16 throughput.

API support shows a generational gap. The RTX 3050 A Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, which includes hardware ray tracing and variable rate shading. The Intel Iris Xe supports DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1, which lacks the higher-tier features. Both parts support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, so cross-platform compatibility is identical.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher peak FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile delivers 4.813 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile delivers 1.856 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA part provides approximately 2.6 times the FP32 throughput.

Q: Does the Intel Iris Xe support hardware ray tracing?

A: No. The database lists no ray tracing cores for the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile. The NVIDIA RTX 3050 A Mobile includes 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores for hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The Intel Iris Xe uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA RTX 3050 A Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which DirectX feature level does each GPU support?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3050 A Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2. The Intel Iris Xe supports DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

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

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3050 A Mobile has an average benchmark score of 8,746 based on eight recorded tests. The Intel Iris Xe has an average benchmark score of 0, as the database contains no benchmark results for this part.

Q: How do the nearest rivals compare to the RTX 3050 A Mobile?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 scores 8,743 points with a 0% delta, the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 scores 8,686 points with a 0.7% delta, the AMD Radeon R9 M265X scores 8,851 points with a -1.2% delta, and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 scores 8,863 points with a -1.3% delta.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its PassMark G3D score of 11,664 indicates strong general 3D rendering, suitable for modern games and 3D applications. The DirectX 11 score of 94 and DirectX 12 score of 55 show compatibility across API generations, though the drop at DirectX 12 suggests the part performs best in legacy or DX11 titles. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 52,998 and PassMark GPU Compute score of 4,419 confirm the part handles compute workloads, making it useful for rendering, simulation, and machine learning inference with its 56 tensor cores.

The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile has no recorded benchmark wins. Its 15 W TDP makes it appropriate for ultra-portable systems where thermal and power constraints limit discrete GPU installation. The system-shared memory design simplifies system architecture and allows the GPU to scale with available RAM. The 2:1 FP16 ratio of 3.712 TFLOPS provides relatively strong half-precision throughput for its FP32 capability, which may benefit certain compute workloads that use FP16 math. The 10 nm process node and Ring Bus interface indicate tight integration with Raptor Lake processors, reducing latency for CPU-GPU communication.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile is the only part with ray tracing and tensor cores, so any workload requiring hardware ray tracing or DLSS-style AI upscaling must use the NVIDIA part. The Intel part lacks these features entirely. The NVIDIA part also has dedicated VRAM, which prevents system memory contention and provides predictable memory bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s. The Intel part's bandwidth depends on the system memory configuration, which varies by laptop design.

For users prioritizing battery life and compact designs, the Intel Iris Xe's 15 W TDP versus 45 W TDP for the NVIDIA part represents a meaningful power savings, though the database does not include battery runtimes. The Intel part is also listed as active production status, while the NVIDIA part is end-of-life, which may affect availability in new systems.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile uses a 10 nm process at Intel foundries, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile uses an 8 nm process at Samsung. The NVIDIA chip contains 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die with a density of 43.5 million transistors per square millimeter; the Intel chip has no transistor or die size data.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The Intel part has a 300 MHz base clock and 1450 MHz boost clock. The NVIDIA part has a 1065 MHz base clock and 1343 MHz boost clock. The NVIDIA part's higher base clock reflects its discrete design, while the Intel part's lower base clock allows power savings when idle.

Memory specifications show a dedicated versus integrated approach. The Intel part uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA part uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth and a 1500 MHz memory clock running at 12 Gbps effective.

Compute unit counts favor the NVIDIA part in every category. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1,792 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, plus 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores. The Intel Iris Xe has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, with no ray tracing or tensor cores.

Rasterization rates follow the unit counts. The NVIDIA part delivers 42.98 GPixel/s and 75.21 GTexel/s. The Intel part delivers 29.00 GPixel/s and 58.00 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 4.813 TFLOPS for NVIDIA versus 1.856 TFLOPS for Intel. FP16 performance is 4.813 TFLOPS at 1:1 for NVIDIA versus 3.712 TFLOPS at 2:1 for Intel.

Power and interface specifications also differ. The Intel part has a 15 W TDP and a Ring Bus interface. The NVIDIA part has a 45 W TDP and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface with no power connectors listed. Both use an IGP slot width and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The NVIDIA part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1); both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Production status and release timing differ. The Intel part is active and was released on January 3, 2023, with its successor listed as Arc Graphics-M. The NVIDIA part is end-of-life and was released on December 31, 2023, with its predecessor listed as GeForce 20 Mobile and no successor listed. Neither part has a recorded launch MSRP.