AMD FirePro S10000 vs Intel Arc A370M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear overall victory for the AMD FirePro S10000, winning both recorded tests against the Intel Arc A370M. The most decisive margin comes in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the AMD card scores 34,145 compared to Intel's 28,673, a substantial 19.1% advantage. This significant gap in Vulkan performance suggests the older GCN architecture retains a strong edge in this particular API workload.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the race is considerably tighter. The AMD FirePro S10000 scores 30,631 against the Intel Arc A370M's 29,676, a narrower 3.2% lead. While still a win for AMD, this smaller margin indicates that the Intel part is far more competitive in OpenCL compute tasks, closing much of the gap that the Vulkan results would suggest.

Looking at the broader database context, the AMD FirePro S10000 sits at the 77th percentile among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 32,388. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE, scores 32,456, placing the FirePro just 0.2% behind. The AMD Radeon Pro 570X trails by 0.7% in the opposite direction, scoring 32,176. This places the FirePro S10000 in a tightly contested cluster where less than a percentage point separates several competing cards.

The Intel Arc A370M, meanwhile, holds the 74th percentile with an average score of 29,175. Its closest competitor, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, scores 29,197, just 0.1% ahead. The AMD FirePro W8000 also sits 0.1% ahead at 29,211, while the AMD Radeon RX 6800M trails the Intel part by 1% with a score of 28,874. The Intel card's position in the database shows it performing on par with these mid-range rivals, though clearly below the AMD FirePro S10000's standing.

The overall average benchmark score difference between the two cards is notable. The AMD FirePro S10000 averages 32,388 across its benchmark results, while the Intel Arc A370M averages 29,175, a gap of roughly 11% in favor of the AMD product. This consistent advantage across both individual tests and the aggregate score makes the outcome unambiguous.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies and eras. The AMD FirePro S10000 uses the Tahiti chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 4,313 million transistors into a 352 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel Arc A370M, by contrast, employs the DG2-128 chip based on Xe-HPG architecture, fabricated on a much more advanced 6 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 7,200 million transistors within a smaller 157 mm² die, achieving a far higher density of 45.9 million transistors per square millimeter.

The memory subsystems diverge sharply. The AMD card offers 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 240.0 GB/s of bandwidth at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The Intel part provides 4 GB of GDDR6 on a much narrower 64-bit bus, reaching only 112.0 GB/s at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). Despite having more capacity, the Intel GPU operates at less than half the memory bandwidth of the AMD card, a critical difference for bandwidth-sensitive workloads.

Compute resources also differ substantially. The AMD FirePro S10000 fields 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. It achieves a pixel rate of 30.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 106.4 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 3.405 TFLOPS. The Intel Arc A370M counters with 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, plus 8 ray tracing cores. Its pixel rate reaches 65.60 GPixel/s and texture rate 131.2 GTexel/s, with FP32 at 4.198 TFLOPS and FP16 at 8.397 TFLOPS (2:1). Interestingly, the Intel part has higher raw throughput numbers despite fewer shading units, reflecting its newer architecture and higher clock speeds.

Clock behavior reinforces this contrast. The AMD card runs at a base clock of 825 MHz with a boost up to 950 MHz. The Intel part operates at 1550 MHz base and 2050 MHz boost, more than doubling the AMD card's frequencies. This clock advantage helps explain how the smaller Intel chip achieves higher fill rates and FP32 throughput.

API support reveals the generational gap. The AMD FirePro S10000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Intel Arc A370M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, plus hardware ray tracing through its 8 RT cores. The Intel part clearly offers more modern feature support, including ray tracing capabilities the AMD card entirely lacks.

Power characteristics could hardly be more different. The AMD FirePro S10000 carries a 375 W TDP, requires dual-slot cooling, and needs two 8-pin power connectors with a suggested 750 W power supply. The Intel Arc A370M is an integrated mobile GPU with a 35 W TDP and no separate power connectors, classified as an IGP. This represents a tenfold difference in power draw, making the Intel part dramatically more efficient for its performance class.

The Verdict

The data points to different buyers for each product. The AMD FirePro S10000 wins on raw benchmark performance, particularly in Vulkan where it leads by 19.1%, and in OpenCL by 3.2%. Its 77th percentile standing and average score of 32,388 place it above the Intel part's 74th percentile and 29,175 average. For users prioritizing maximum compute performance in these specific workloads, the AMD card is the clear choice based on the recorded measurements.

However, the Intel Arc A370M offers capabilities the AMD card cannot match. Its 8 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support provide modern gaming and rendering features that the GCN 1.0 architecture lacks. The 35 W TDP versus 375 W makes it suitable for portable devices, while the AMD card requires a substantial desktop power supply. Its 4 GB memory capacity also exceeds the AMD card's 3 GB, even if bandwidth is far lower.

The AMD FirePro S10000 was released on 2012-11-11 with a launch MSRP of 3,599 USD, while the Intel Arc A370M launched on 2022-03-29 with no recorded MSRP. Both are now end-of-life products, so availability in the current market will depend on existing stock or used channels. The production status for both is listed as end-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro S10000 averages 32,388 across its benchmark results, compared to 29,175 for the Intel Arc A370M, giving the AMD card an approximately 11% advantage.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: The AMD FirePro S10000 scores 34,145 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 28,673 for the Intel Arc A370M, a 19.1% difference in favor of AMD.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A370M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Intel Arc A370M includes 8 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the AMD FirePro S10000 has no ray tracing cores and only supports DirectX 12 (11_1).

Q: What are the memory bandwidth specifications?

A: The AMD FirePro S10000 has 240.0 GB/s bandwidth from 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, while the Intel Arc A370M has 112.0 GB/s from 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The AMD FirePro S10000 has a 375 W TDP and requires a 750 W suggested power supply, while the Intel Arc A370M has a 35 W TDP and is classified as an IGP with no separate power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has the higher transistor density?

A: The Intel Arc A370M achieves 45.9 million transistors per square millimeter across its 157 mm² die, while the AMD FirePro S10000 has 12.3 million per square millimeter on a 352 mm² die.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro S10000 wins decisively in benchmark performance, taking both recorded tests. Its 19.1% Vulkan advantage makes it the stronger choice for Vulkan-based applications, and its 3.2% OpenCL lead extends that edge to OpenCL compute workloads. The card's 384-bit memory bus and 240.0 GB/s bandwidth provide a substantial data throughput advantage over the Intel part's 64-bit bus and 112.0 GB/s, which should benefit memory-intensive tasks. Its higher percentile ranking, 77th versus 74th, confirms its superior standing in the overall database.

The Intel Arc A370M wins on architectural modernity and efficiency. Its 6 nm process with 45.9M transistors per square millimeter density represents a far more advanced manufacturing approach than the AMD card's 28 nm process with 12.3M density. The 8 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support enable features entirely absent from the AMD card. Its 35 W TDP makes it viable for mobile and portable devices, whereas the AMD card's 375 W TDP confines it to desktop systems with substantial power supplies. The Intel part also offers higher FP32 throughput at 4.198 TFLOPS versus 3.405 TFLOPS, plus FP16 support at 8.397 TFLOPS, which the AMD card lacks entirely.

For gaming workloads that leverage ray tracing or DirectX 12 Ultimate features, the Intel Arc A370M is the only option between these two. For raw compute performance in Vulkan and OpenCL as measured in the database, the AMD FirePro S10000 remains the superior choice despite its age.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The AMD FirePro S10000 uses the Tahiti chip on GCN 1.0 architecture with a 28 nm process, while the Intel Arc A370M uses DG2-128 on Xe-HPG architecture with a 6 nm process. Transistor counts stand at 4,313 million for AMD and 7,200 million for Intel, with die sizes of 352 mm² and 157 mm² respectively. Transistor density favors Intel at 45.9M per mm² versus 12.3M for AMD.

Clock speeds show Intel's advantage: 1550 MHz base and 2050 MHz boost for Intel versus 825 MHz base and 950 MHz boost for AMD. Memory configurations differ completely, with AMD offering 3 GB GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus at 240.0 GB/s, and Intel offering 4 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus at 112.0 GB/s. Memory clocks are 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for AMD and 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for Intel.

Compute unit counts favor AMD in shading units (1,792 versus 1,024) and TMUs (112 versus 64), while both have 32 ROPs. The Intel card uniquely has 8 ray tracing cores. Pixel rates favor Intel at 65.60 GPixel/s versus 30.40 GPixel/s, as do texture rates at 131.2 GTexel/s versus 106.4 GTexel/s. FP32 performance favors Intel at 4.198 TFLOPS versus 3.405 TFLOPS, and Intel adds FP16 at 8.397 TFLOPS with no equivalent for AMD.

Power and physical specifications diverge dramatically: 375 W TDP with dual-slot cooling and 2x 8-pin connectors for AMD, versus 35 W TDP with IGP classification and no power connectors for Intel. The AMD card requires a 750 W suggested PSU, while Intel lists none. Bus interfaces are PCIe 3.0 x16 for AMD and PCIe 4.0 x8 for Intel. Display outputs are 1x DVI and 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 for AMD, while Intel's are portable device dependent. The AMD card measures 305 mm by 111 mm, while Intel has no recorded dimensions. API support shows Intel's advantage with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 versus AMD's DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, though both support OpenGL 4.6.