Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics compare to the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile scores 56,518, while the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics scores 14,315. This represents a 74.7% deficit for the Intel part, making the NVIDIA GPU roughly four times faster in this compute test.

Q: Which GPU has a higher overall benchmark percentile ranking?

A: The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics sits at the 56th percentile among all GPUs, while the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile is at the 55th percentile. Despite the massive gap in raw Geekbench scores, both parts are ranked nearly identically in the overall distribution.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU according to average benchmark scores?

A: For the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics, the closest rivals include the AMD Radeon Vega 11 (14,352, 0.3% ahead), NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN (14,373, 0.4% ahead), and AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (14,385, 0.5% ahead). For the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile, the AMD Radeon 660M (13,812, 0.1% behind) and AMD Radeon RX 570X (13,871, 0.4% ahead) are nearest.

Q: What memory configurations do these two GPUs use?

A: Both GPUs feature 4 GB of memory on a 128-bit bus. The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics uses LPDDR4X at 4.3 Gbps effective, yielding 68.26 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile uses GDDR6 at 12 Gbps effective, yielding 192.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports hardware ray tracing?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile includes 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores as part of its Ampere architecture. The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics lists no RT cores or tensor cores, indicating no dedicated hardware for these workloads.

Q: What are the production statuses of these two GPUs?

A: Both are listed as end-of-life. The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics was released on 2020-10-30, and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile followed on 2021-04-11.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics is built on Intel's Generation 12.1 architecture using the DG1 chip, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process with a die size of 95 mm². The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile uses the Ampere architecture with the GA107 chip, fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process with a die size of 200 mm² and 8,700 million transistors. The transistor density for the NVIDIA part is 43.5M per mm², while the Intel chip does not report transistor count.

The two GPUs diverge significantly in compute resources. The Intel part has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units. The NVIDIA part more than triples the shading unit count to 2,560, with 80 TMUs and 48 ROPs. The NVIDIA GPU also includes dedicated hardware the Intel part lacks: 20 RT cores for ray tracing and 80 tensor cores for AI workloads.

Memory technology differs substantially. Intel pairs DG1 with LPDDR4X memory running at 2133 MHz (4.3 Gbps effective), while NVIDIA uses GDDR6 at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). Both use a 128-bit bus, but the resulting bandwidth is 68.26 GB/s for Intel versus 192.0 GB/s for NVIDIA — a 2.8x advantage for the RTX A2000 Mobile.

The compute throughput gap is stark. The Intel GPU delivers 2.534 TFLOPS FP32 and 5.069 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). The NVIDIA GPU delivers 8.637 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.637 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). This means NVIDIA offers 3.4x the FP32 throughput and 1.7x the FP16 throughput, with the added benefit of full-rate FP16 rather than a halved rate.

Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern. Intel achieves 39.60 GPixel/s and 79.20 GTexel/s; NVIDIA achieves 80.98 GPixel/s and 135.0 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA part roughly doubles pixel throughput and delivers 1.7x the texture fill rate.

Power and interface specifications also differ. The Intel GPU has a 25 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 200 W, while the NVIDIA GPU has a 95 W TDP with no suggested PSU listed. Both use PCIe 4.0, but Intel uses x8 lanes while NVIDIA uses x16 lanes. The Intel part has no display outputs; the NVIDIA part's outputs are portable-device dependent. API support shows Intel at DirectX 12 (12_1) versus NVIDIA at DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), with both supporting OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy, but the ranking context is nuanced. In the sole head-to-head benchmark available, Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile dominates with a score of 56,518 versus 14,315 for the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics — a 74.7% lead. This is consistent with the architectural differences: NVIDIA has more shading units, higher clocks, faster memory, and dedicated ray tracing and tensor hardware.

However, the percentile rankings tell an interesting story. The Intel GPU is at the 56th percentile, and the NVIDIA GPU is at the 55th percentile. This near-identical ranking suggests that the Geekbench OpenCL score is not representative of the full spectrum of GPU workloads, or that the benchmark distribution is heavily weighted toward other performance tiers. The average benchmark scores are also close: 14,315 for Intel versus 13,821 for NVIDIA, with the NVIDIA part actually slightly below the Intel part in this aggregate metric.

For users choosing between these two end-of-life parts, the decision hinges on workload. For compute-heavy tasks measured by OpenCL, the RTX A2000 Mobile is the obvious pick — it delivers nearly four times the raw score. For general GPU compute at a lower power envelope, the Iris Xe MAX's 25 W TDP versus 95 W TDP may be attractive in constrained systems, but the performance penalty is severe. The NVIDIA part also offers ray tracing and tensor core capabilities that the Intel part cannot match, making it the only choice for those workloads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics | NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | DG1 | GA107 |

| Architecture | Generation 12.1 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | Samsung |

| Die Size | 95 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistors | Not reported | 8,700 million |

| Transistor Density | Not reported | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 300 MHz | 1215 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1650 MHz | 1687 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2133 MHz / 4.3 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz / 12 Gbps effective |

| Memory Type | LPDDR4X | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 68.26 GB/s | 192.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 48 | 80 |

| ROPs | 24 | 48 |

| RT Cores | None | 20 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 80 |

| Pixel Rate | 39.60 GPixel/s | 80.98 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 79.20 GTexel/s | 135.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.534 TFLOPS | 8.637 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 5.069 TFLOPS (2:1) | 8.637 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 25 W | 95 W |

| Suggested PSU | 200 W | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Release Date | 2020-10-30 | 2021-04-11 |

| Predecessor | Graphics | Quadro Turing-M |

| Successor | Alchemist | Ada-MW |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only one benchmark directly compares these two GPUs in the data: Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile scores 56,518, while the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics scores 14,315. The delta is -74.7% for the Intel part, meaning NVIDIA outperforms by a factor of 3.95x.

This single result is reinforced by the architectural specifications. The NVIDIA GPU's 2,560 shading units operate at a boost clock of 1687 MHz, compared to Intel's 768 shading units at 1650 MHz. The shading unit count difference alone (3.33x) closely tracks the 3.95x score difference. Memory bandwidth also aligns: NVIDIA's 192.0 GB/s is 2.81x Intel's 68.26 GB/s, which contributes to the compute gap.

The NVIDIA part also wins on pixel rate (80.98 GPixel/s versus 39.60 GPixel/s, a 2.05x advantage) and texture rate (135.0 GTexel/s versus 79.20 GTexel/s, a 1.70x advantage). In FP32 throughput, NVIDIA delivers 8.637 TFLOPS versus Intel's 2.534 TFLOPS, a 3.41x lead.

The Intel GPU does not win any head-to-head benchmarks in the data — winsA is 0, winsB is 1. However, the Intel part's 25 W TDP versus NVIDIA's 95 W TDP means it consumes 73.7% less power, which could be decisive in thermally constrained designs.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile wins decisively in raw compute performance. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 56,518 versus 14,315 makes it the clear choice for OpenCL-based workloads, scientific computing, and any task that leverages general-purpose GPU compute. Its 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores extend its advantage to ray tracing and AI inference, areas where the Intel GPU has no dedicated hardware. The 192.0 GB/s memory bandwidth supports larger and faster data transfers, and the 8.637 TFLOPS FP32 throughput handles heavy graphics workloads. For applications that can use DirectX 12 Ultimate features, the NVIDIA part's 12_2 support versus Intel's 12_1 adds another compatibility edge.

Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics wins in power efficiency and integration. At 25 W TDP versus 95 W for the NVIDIA part, the Intel GPU requires substantially less power and a lower suggested PSU rating (200 W versus none listed for NVIDIA). Its IGP form factor and lack of display outputs suggest it is designed for embedded or secondary compute roles rather than primary graphics output. The 95 mm² die size versus 200 mm² for NVIDIA means a smaller physical footprint. For systems where power draw is the limiting factor and the workload is modest, the Intel part's lower consumption profile is its primary selling point. However, the data shows no benchmark where the Intel GPU outperforms the NVIDIA part, so its wins are purely in power and physical characteristics.