AMD FirePro D500 vs Intel Arc A750 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench Vulkan, and the result is decisive. The Intel Arc A750 scores 85,631, while the AMD FirePro D500 scores 18,533. That places the Arc A750 362% ahead in this API-level test. In practical terms, the Arc A750 delivers more than four times the Vulkan compute throughput of the FirePro D500, a gap that reflects not just raw shading power but also driver maturity and hardware feature support.

Looking at the broader database context, the Arc A750's average benchmark score is 20,582, which lands it in the 66th percentile of all GPUs tracked. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Arc B570 at 20,556 (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile at 20,534 (0.2% behind), the AMD Radeon R9 M390X at 20,662 (0.4% ahead), and the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M at 20,480 (0.5% behind). The FirePro D500, by contrast, has an average score of 18,533, placing it in the 62nd percentile. Its closest competitors are the AMD Radeon RX 560X at 18,626 (0.5% ahead), the Intel Arc A770M at 18,383 (0.8% behind), the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT at 18,685 (0.8% ahead), and the AMD Radeon RX 460 at 18,373 (0.9% behind).

The delta between the two cards is not subtle. The Arc A750 sits comfortably above the FirePro D500 in percentile rank, and its Vulkan score is so far ahead that no other benchmark in the pack could plausibly reverse the overall picture. The FirePro D500 has no recorded wins in any head-to-head test. The data shows a single benchmark, a single winner, and a margin that is effectively categorical.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different eras and design philosophies. The Intel Arc A750 uses the DG2-512 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 53.4 million per square millimeter. The AMD FirePro D500 uses the Tahiti chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, also made by TSMC but on a 28 nm process. It packs 4,313 million transistors into a 352 mm² die, for a density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. That process gap alone explains much of the performance differential: the Arc A750 has roughly five times the transistor count on a slightly larger die.

Core counts diverge sharply. The Arc A750 has 3,584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, 112 render output units, and 28 ray tracing cores. The FirePro D500 has 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no ray tracing hardware at all. Pixel rate for the Arc A750 is 268.8 GPixel/s, versus 23.20 GPixel/s for the FirePro. Texture rate is 537.6 GTexel/s versus 69.60 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 17.20 TFLOPS versus 2.227 TFLOPS. The Arc A750 also supports FP16 at 34.41 TFLOPS via a 2:1 ratio, while the FirePro D500 has no recorded FP16 capability.

Memory systems are also generations apart. The Arc A750 comes with 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro D500 has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, providing 243.8 GB/s. Despite the FirePro's wider bus, the Arc A750's faster memory and larger capacity give it more than double the bandwidth. Clock speeds tell a similar story: the Arc A750 runs at a 2050 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, with memory at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The FirePro D500 has no recorded base or boost clock, but its memory runs at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective).

API support widens the gap further. The Arc A750 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro D500 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Arc A750 also includes modern display outputs: one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 2.0. The FirePro D500 offers six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 and one SDI output, a workstation-oriented configuration that predates current consumer connectivity standards. Power requirements differ as well: the Arc A750 is rated at 225 W TDP with a suggested 550 W PSU, while the FirePro D500 is rated at 274 W TDP with a suggested 600 W PSU.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The Intel Arc A750 wins the only head-to-head test by 362%, holds a higher average score (20,582 versus 18,533), and ranks in the 66th percentile versus the FirePro D500's 62nd. There is no scenario in the recorded results where the FirePro D500 outperforms the Arc A750. The Arc A750 is the faster card in every measurable dimension: shading units, texture rate, pixel rate, FP32 compute, memory bandwidth, and API compatibility.

Who should pick the Arc A750? Anyone running modern workloads that leverage DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, or ray tracing. Its 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth suit high-resolution gaming and compute tasks. The card is end-of-life, but its feature set remains relevant for current software. The FirePro D500, by contrast, is a legacy workstation part from 2014 with 3 GB of GDDR5. Its 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 and SDI output might still serve niche video routing or multi-display setups, but its compute and graphics performance are far behind. The data shows no reason to choose the FirePro D500 for any benchmark-driven task.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Arc A750 in Vulkan than the AMD FirePro D500?

A: The Arc A750 scores 85,631 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the FirePro D500 scores 18,533. That is a 362% advantage for the Arc A750.

Q: What are the memory capacities and bandwidths of the two cards?

A: The Arc A750 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro D500 has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 243.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: The Intel Arc A750 includes 28 ray tracing cores. The AMD FirePro D500 has no ray tracing hardware listed in the database.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two GPUs?

A: The Arc A750 is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The FirePro D500 uses a 28 nm process, also at TSMC.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Arc A750 has an average benchmark score of 20,582, placing it in the 66th percentile. The FirePro D500 averages 18,533, in the 62nd percentile.

Q: What display outputs does each card offer?

A: The Arc A750 provides one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The FirePro D500 provides six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs and one SDI output.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A750 wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its Vulkan score is 362% higher, and its average score is 2,049 points higher. The card also leads in raw specs that matter for modern workloads: 17.20 TFLOPS FP32 versus 2.227 TFLOPS, 537.6 GTexel/s versus 69.60 GTexel/s, and 268.8 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s. For gaming, ray tracing, DX12 Ultimate, and Vulkan 1.4 applications, the Arc A750 is the only viable option in this comparison.

The AMD FirePro D500 does have a few niche advantages, though none are captured in benchmark wins. Its 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 plus SDI output is a specialized workstation feature that could serve multi-display video walls or broadcast environments. Its 384-bit memory bus, while paired with slower GDDR5, still provides 243.8 GB/s, which is respectable for its era. The card's 32 ROPs and 1,536 shading units are workmanlike for legacy OpenGL 4.6 applications. But in any performance comparison, the FirePro D500 falls behind by margins that range from large to enormous. The data supports a simple conclusion: the Arc A750 is the superior GPU, and the FirePro D500 is best reserved for vintage hardware collectors or specific multi-output workstation duties.