Intel ARC 140V vs 1650; Intel’s latest iGPU vs Nvidia’s 16-series mobile dGPU. Which one is better?
Intel ARC 140V is the integrated Graphics by Intel used in Intel’s new Core Ultra series 2 CPUs; Intel Core Ultra 7/9 series CPUs. It is based on battlemage XE2-based architecture.
Nvidia GTX 1650 is a discrete GPU by Nvidia that is used in Laptops as a secondary graphics card. It is based on Turing architecture, capable of running games at 1080p med/high settings.
Graphics Card Comparison between Arc 140V vs 1650M
ARC 140V | VS | GTX 1650M |
---|---|---|
Intel Arc Graphics 140V | GPU Codename | TU117 |
Xe2-LPG | Architecture | Turing |
24th, Sept 2024 | Release date | 15th, Apr 2020 |
ARC Graphics (Lunar Lake) | Generation | Geforce 16 mobile |
Intel | Foundry | TSMC |
Laptop | Market Segment | Laptop |
Active | Production | Active |
Integrated | Type | Dedicated |
Intel ARC 140V graphics is based on Xe2-LPG architecture while GTX 1650 mobile is based on Turing.
Intel ARC 140V vs Geforce 1650 Specs Comparison
ARC 140V | VS | GTX 1650M |
---|---|---|
— | SM | 16 SM |
64 EUs | Execution Units | — |
1024 Units | Shaders / Shading Units | 1024 Units |
64 | TMUs (Texture Mapping Units) | 64 |
32 | ROPs (Raster Operation Pipeline) | 32 |
8 | RayTracing Cores | Nil |
L1 Cache | 64 KB (per SM) | |
L2 Cache | 1 MB | |
600 MHz | Base Clock | 1380 MHz |
1950-2050 MHz | Boost Clock | 1515 MHz |
ARC 140V GPU and GTX 1650 Mobile both have 1024 Shaders. The ARC 140V base clock is low compared to the 1650 mobile.
Intel ARC 140V has 8 RayTracing Cores while Nvidia GTX 1650 mobile doesn’t have any RT Cores.
ARC 140V vs GTX 1650 Board Design Comparison
ARC 140V | VS | GTX 1650M |
---|---|---|
Transistors | 4.7 billion | |
3 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
Die Size | 200 mm² | |
Density | 23.5M / mm² | |
FCBGA2833 | Chip Package | BGA-960 |
17-30W | TDP (Total Draw Power) | 50W |
IGP | Slot Width | IGP |
Portable Device Dependent | Outputs | Portable Device Dependent |
Ring Bus | Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
None | Power Connectors | None |
The process node of ARC 140V is 3nm while GTX 1650 mobile GPU has a 12nm process.
Nvidia GTX 1650 power consumption is 50W while Intel Arc 140V draws 17-30W of power.
ARC 140V Intel vs GTX 1650 Memory Comparison
ARC 140V | VS | GTX 1650M |
---|---|---|
System Shared | Memory Size | 4GB |
System Shared | Memory Type | GDDR6 |
System Shared | Memory Bus | 128-bit |
System Shared | Memory Clock | 1500 MHz 12 Gbps effective |
System Dependent | Bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s |
Intel ARC 140V graphics is an iGPU so it shares its VRAM capacity with the system RAM. The VRAM allocation is as much as 16GB from the system RAM for ARC 140V.
GTX 1650 mobile memory is 4GB GDDR6 with a memory bandwidth of 192GB/s.
1650 mobile vs Arc 140V Theoretical Performance Comparison
ARC 140V | VS | GTX 1650M |
---|---|---|
62.4~65.6 GPixel/s | Pixel Fill Rate | 48.48 GPixel/s |
124.8~131.2 GTexel/s | Texture Fill Rate | 96.96 GTexel/s |
7.9 – 8.3 TFLOPS | FP16 (Half) | 6.205 TFLOPS |
3.9 – 4.19 TFLOPS | FP32 (Float) | 3.103 TFLOPS |
FP64 (Double) | 96.96 GFLOPS |
ARC 140V Teraflops is 3.9 – 4.19 TFLOPS while GTX 1650 flops is 3.1 TFLOPS.
GTX 1650 mobile vs Arc 140V API Features Comparison
ARC 140V | VS | GTX 1650M |
---|---|---|
12 Ultimate (12_2) | DirectX | 12 (12_1) |
4.6 | OpenGL | 4.6 |
2.1 | OpenCL | 3.0 |
1.3 | Vulkan | 1.3 |
6.8 | Shader Model | 6.8 |
— | Cuda | 7.5 |
2.1 | DisplayPort | 1.4 |
2.1 | HDMI | 2.0 |
2.3 | HDCP Version | 2.2 |
Intel ARC 140V vs GTX 1650 mobile Benchmark Comparison
ARC 140V (2.05GHz) | VS | GTX 1650M |
---|---|---|
4100 | Time Spy Graphics | 3760 |
9831 | Firestrike Graphics | 10342 |
30092 | OpenCL | 41246 |
36196 | Vulkan | 37375 |
5214 | Passmark | 7404 |
Intel ARC 140V Time spy score is 4100 while GTX 1650 mobile Timespy score is 3760. Arc 140V Firestrike graphics score is 9831 and GTX 1650 mobile Firestrike score is 10342.
ARC 140V Open Cl score and Vulkan score are 30092 and 36196 while GTX 1650 mobile has an Open CL Score of 41246 and Vulkan score of 37375.
Intel ARC 140V Passmark score is 5214 while Radeon 780M Passmark is 7404.
Intel Arc 140V vs GTX 1650 Mobile Gaming Benchmark Comparison
The laptop used for the Arc 140V is ASUS ZENBOOK S14 OLED with Intel Core Ultra 7 258V and IGPU ARC 140V clocked at 1.95GHz, 32GB LPDDR5X-8433 MT/S RAM, 1TB Gen4 SSD, and Windows 11.
The Laptop used for GTX 1650 mobile is Lenovo Legion 5 with Ryzen 7 4800H, 16GB DDR4 3200 MT/s RAM, and Win 11.
Arc 140V (30W) Intel Ultra 7 258V (FPS) | Games Graphics Settings | GTX 1650M (FPS) |
---|---|---|
68 | Forza Horizon 4 1080 High | 94 |
46 | FarCry 5 1080p High | 59 |
120 | Rainbow Six Siege 1080p V.High, Res 50% | 175 |
44 | Horizon Zero Dawn 1080p Med | 55 |
30 | Metro Exodus 1080p High | 40 |
48 | Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1080p High | 51 |
38 | Watchdogs Legion 1080p med | 50 |
47 | AC Valhalla 1080p Med | 49 |
61 | The Witcher 3 1080p Med | 82 |
40 | Control 1080p Med | 40 |
Conclusion
Intel ARC 140V loses to GTX 1650 mobile due to lower TDP disadvantage plus the iGPU used in Core Ultra 7 258V has lower clocks.
GTX 1650 mobile is still a good contender to the new arc 140V in 1080p gaming. GTX 1650 mobile has a higher TDP limit with faster memory despite in some games Arc 140V touched the GTX 1650 mobile performance in gaming.
FAQs
Is the Intel ARC 140V and 1650 good for gaming?
ARC 140V and 1650 both have good graphics easily able to run games at 1080p med settings in old AAA titles. GTX 1650 Mobile is still able to play AAA title games at 1080p med settings.
In modern AAA titles also they are pretty much capable of running games at 1080p med/low settings and some games run at high settings. The use of FSR and XESS can boost the framerates to 60FPS.
Which is better GTX 1650 mobile or Intel ARC 140V?
In this test, Intel ARC 140V was crushed by GTX 1650 mobile due to variation in clocks and TDP as GTX 1650 is a dedicated GPU with high TDP and faster memory plus the difference in architecture.
What are the computing capabilities of GTX 1650 mobile and ARC 140V?
GTX 1650 mobile Tflops is 3.1 TFLOPS while ARC 140V Tflops is 3.9 – 4.19 TFLOPS.