AMD claims that Radeon RX 6500M is stronger than Intel Arc A370M

Recently, Intel released the Intel Arc brand Alchemist (DG2) discrete graphics card with Xe-HPG architecture. The first launch is the A350M and A370M, two entry-level mobile platform products, both of which use the smaller ACM-G11 SoC.

AMD officially released a chart recently, which uses the Radeon RX 6500M and Arc A370M to compare the performance. The graph shows that the Radeon RX 6500M beat the Arc A370M when tested in five games at 1080P resolution and medium settings.

The Radeon RX 6500M is built on Navi 24, TSMC’s 6nm process, measures 107 mm², has 5.4 billion transistors, and has 16 CUs (1024 stream processors). Arc A370M adopts ACM-G11, which is also manufactured by the TSMC 6nm process, with a size of 157 mm², a total of 7.2 billion transistors, and 8 Xe cores. In terms of scale, the ACM-G11 is larger than the Navi 24. In addition, both have a 64-bit memory width and are equipped with 4GB of GDDR6 memory.

In fact, Navi 24 and ACM-G11 have some common features, such as using TSMC’s N6 process, and the same configuration of video memory (although the full specification of ACM-G11 is 96-bit). As mobile GPUs, both have the same TDP range, 35W to 50W.

AMD’s diagram also has a deep meaning, and its design style is very similar to the diagram shown by Intel at the conference, which is somewhat mocking. At that time, when Intel talked about game performance, it was very vague. It only compared the Arc A370M with the Iris Xe core integrated graphics of the Core i7-1280P.

Of course, Intel also has a place to beat its opponents. Since the PCIe 4.0 interface of Navi 24 is only four channels and does not support 4K H.264/H.265 encoding and AV1 decoding, many users complained after its release. In contrast, Intel’s ACM-G11 has an eight-lane PCIe 4.0 interface and supports hardware codecs in VP9, ​​AVC, HEVC, and AV1 formats, supporting up to 8K60 12-bit HDR hard decoding, and 8K 10-bit HDR hard coding. Entry-level GPUs may be less important in terms of gaming performance, while Intel’s Xe media engine may be more advantageous in everyday applications.