Intel
Intel Arc A350M vs Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
Intel
Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Intel Arc A350M and Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗Intel Arc A350M outperforms Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics by ~3% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+3%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: Intel Arc A350M (~2%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider Intel Arc A350M
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0 · XeSS
Reasons to consider Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0 · XeSS
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
IntelPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3332
100100
5555
6050
Graphics card ranking
Positions 82–87of 411
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Intel Arc A350M
138 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
33Better
32
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
30Better
29
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
28Better
27
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100
100
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
44Better
43
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Release date
Upscaling
HDMI
DisplayPort
Max resolution
Max monitors
USB Type-C
Recommended PSU
Length
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumption
Architecture
Memory type
Compute API
Launch price——
Shader units / cores
Interface
Thickness
Die sizeBetter
Memory cache
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAM
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Power consumption
Process nodeBetter
Transistor count
Device class
Power connector
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares Intel Arc A350M and Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
Intel Arc A350MIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
164 FPS
160 FPS
1080p Ultra
116 FPS
113 FPS
1440p Ultra
62 FPS
61 FPS
4K Ultra
22 FPS
22 FPS
Counter-Strike 2Intel Arc A350M164 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics160 FPSIntel Arc A350M116 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics113 FPSIntel Arc A350M62 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics61 FPSIntel Arc A350M22 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics22 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077Intel Arc A350M106 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics103 FPSIntel Arc A350M91 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics89 FPSIntel Arc A350M45 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics44 FPSIntel Arc A350M15 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics15 FPS
Forza Horizon 5Intel Arc A350M134 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics130 FPSIntel Arc A350M87 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics84 FPSIntel Arc A350M56 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics55 FPSIntel Arc A350M33 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics32 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyIntel Arc A350M87 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics84 FPSIntel Arc A350M72 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics71 FPSIntel Arc A350M40 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics39 FPSIntel Arc A350M15 FPSIntel Iris Xe MAX Graphics15 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 10033323%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100433812%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100413710%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100605018%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001001000%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100454012%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100443912%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100413710%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100484213%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100413710%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX12.212.1
Vulkan1.41.4
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingXeSSXeSS
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0OpenCL 3.0
Architecture and release
ArchitectureXe HPG (Alchemist)Xe LP
Process node6 nmBetter10 nm
Release date20222020
Device classMobileMobile
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count7200 millionNot publicly specified
Die size157 mm²95 mm²Better
Shader units / cores768768
Base clock1150 MHzBetter300 MHz
Boost clock2200 MHzBetter1650 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x8
LengthOEM dependentOEM dependent
ThicknessIGPIGP
Recommended PSUOEM dependent200 W
Power connectorIntegrated laptop powerIntegrated laptop power
Display outputs and limits
HDMIOEM dependentOEM dependent
DisplayPortOEM dependentOEM dependent
USB Type-COEM dependentOEM dependent
Max monitorsOEM dependentOEM dependent
Max resolutionDepends on host systemDepends on host system
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM4 GB GDDR64 GB LPDDR4X
Memory typeGDDR6LPDDR4X
Memory bus64 bit128 bitBetter
TFLOPS3.379Better2.534
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 68
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (2)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (2)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: Intel Arc A350M or Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics?+
Intel Arc A350M has the higher overall gaming score, while Intel Arc A350M offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
Intel Arc A350M is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
Intel Arc A350M is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
Intel Arc A350M offers more overall performance, while Intel Arc A350M offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
Intel Arc A350M is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
Intel Arc A350M is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
Intel Arc A350M leads in combined 1440p performance. Intel Arc A350M can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
Intel Arc A350M is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
Intel Arc A350M is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
Intel Arc A350M is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to Intel Arc A350M if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.