AMD Radeon 8050S vs Intel Arc A380E Comparison

AMD Radeon 8050S is an integrated graphics solution built on the Strix Halo chip, using the RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process. Intel Arc A380E is a discrete single-slot card based on the DG2-128 chip, using the Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process. The recorded data shows a substantial performance gap between the two, driven by differences in compute resources, memory architecture, and clock behavior. The AMD part delivers an average benchmark score of 62108, placing it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the Intel part has no recorded benchmark scores and sits in the 50th percentile. This analysis walks through the head-to-head results, use-case implications, architectural differences, and specification comparisons strictly from the database records.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for these two products. However, the AMD Radeon 8050S has two recorded benchmark scores: 65818 in Geekbench OpenCL and 58398 in Geekbench Vulkan. Its average benchmark score is 62108. The Intel Arc A380E has zero recorded benchmark scores, resulting in an average benchmark score of 0. This absence of data for the Intel part means direct numerical comparison is limited to the AMD side and its nearest rivals.

The AMD Radeon 8050S average score of 62108 positions it 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M, which scores 61896. Against the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56, the 8050S trails by 2.5%, as that rival scores 63693. The AMD Radeon RX 7600M scores 63775, putting the 8050S 2.6% behind. The AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP scores 63830, leaving the 8050S 2.7% behind. These delta percentages show the 8050S sits in a tight cluster, within roughly three percent of four comparable AMD parts.

The Intel Arc A380E has no benchmark scores in the database, so its performance cannot be quantified against the 8050S or any other GPU. Its percentile ranking of 50 indicates it sits at the median of all recorded GPUs, but without scores, the practical meaning of that rank is limited. The 8050S at the 89th percentile is clearly positioned well above the median, and the gap in recorded compute performance is stark. The 8050S delivers 11.47 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the A380E delivers 4.096 TFLOPS. That is a 2.8x difference in raw floating-point compute, a factor that would dominate any workload relying on shader math.

Texture and pixel throughput follow the same pattern. The 8050S achieves 358.4 GTexel/s and 179.2 GPixel/s, while the A380E achieves 128.0 GTexel/s and 64.00 GPixel/s. The AMD part is 2.8x faster in texture rate and 2.8x faster in pixel rate. These ratios align with the FP32 difference, suggesting the architecture scales consistently across these metrics. The 8050S also has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units, versus 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs on the A380E. Every compute resource is doubled on the AMD side.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 8050S wins in every measurable compute category recorded in the database. Its FP32 throughput of 11.47 TFLOPS is nearly three times the A380E's 4.096 TFLOPS. FP16 performance shows a different ratio: the 8050S delivers 11.47 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the A380E delivers 8.192 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. In FP16 workloads, the AMD part is still ahead by 40%, but the gap narrows because the Intel architecture uses a packed rate that doubles its FP16 output relative to FP32.

Ray tracing resources also favor the AMD part. The 8050S has 32 ray tracing cores, while the A380E has 8. This fourfold difference suggests the AMD part would handle ray-traced scenes with more parallel traversal and intersection work. The 8050S also benefits from a higher boost clock of 2800 MHz versus the A380E's fixed 2000 MHz clock. The Intel part runs at a constant 2000 MHz for both base and boost, while the AMD part scales from 1295 MHz base to 2800 MHz boost, a 116% increase under load.

Memory is a major differentiator. The A380E has 6 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, delivering 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 8050S uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent. This means the AMD part's memory performance depends entirely on the host platform's memory configuration, which is not specified in the database. For workloads that are bandwidth-sensitive, the A380E's fixed 186.0 GB/s could be advantageous in a system with slow shared memory, but the 8050S on a capable platform could exceed that figure. The database does not provide a definitive comparison here.

The A380E wins in power efficiency considerations, though not in raw performance. Its 75 W TDP is higher than the 8050S's 55 W TDP, but it is a discrete card with its own memory. The 8050S is an integrated graphics processor, so its 55 W TDP covers only the GPU portion, not the system memory it shares. The A380E also has a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the 8050S has no suggested PSU listed. The Intel part is a single-slot card measuring 254 mm by 127 mm by 20 mm, while the 8050S has no dimensions listed and is classified as an IGP.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 8050S uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 308 mm². The Intel Arc A380E uses the Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 157 mm². The Intel part has a known transistor count of 7,200 million, resulting in a transistor density of 45.9 million per square millimeter. The AMD part has an unknown transistor count, so no density can be calculated.

The 8050S belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation, while the A380E belongs to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. The AMD chip is Strix Halo, and the Intel chip is DG2-128. The AMD part's predecessor is Polaris Mobile, while the Intel part's predecessor is Xe Graphics. The Intel part has a successor listed as Battlemage, while the AMD part has no successor. Production status differs: the 8050S is active, while the A380E is end-of-life.

Clock behavior is fundamentally different. The 8050S has a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 2800 MHz, allowing dynamic frequency scaling. The A380E has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz, meaning it runs at a fixed frequency with no boost headroom. Memory clocks also differ: the A380E runs at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective data rate, while the 8050S uses system shared memory with no dedicated clock listed.

Shader configuration differs in both count and organization. The 8050S has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The A380E has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Ray tracing cores are 32 on the AMD part versus 8 on the Intel part. Neither part lists tensor cores. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level feature support is identical.

Bus interface and display outputs diverge. The 8050S uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the A380E uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The AMD part has display outputs described as portable device dependent, while the Intel part has 4x DisplayPort 2.0. The A380E requires no power connectors and is a single-slot card, while the 8050S also uses no power connectors but is classified as an IGP with no slot width.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 8050S has an average benchmark score of 62108, while the Intel Arc A380E has an average benchmark score of 0 due to no recorded benchmark entries.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 8050S compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 8050S is 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M, 2.5% behind the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56, 2.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7600M, and 2.7% behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 8050S uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The Intel Arc A380E has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon 8050S has 2048 shading units, while the Intel Arc A380E has 1024 shading units.

Q: What is the TDP of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 8050S has a TDP of 55 W, and the Intel Arc A380E has a TDP of 75 W.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 8050S is listed as active, while the Intel Arc A380E is listed as end-of-life.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a decisive performance advantage for the AMD Radeon 8050S in every compute metric where both parts have data. The 8050S delivers 11.47 TFLOPS of FP32 versus 4.096 TFLOPS on the A380E, 358.4 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s, and 179.2 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s. It has double the shading units, TMUs, and ROPs, and four times the ray tracing cores. Its 89th percentile ranking against all GPUs places it far above the A380E's 50th percentile.

The Intel Arc A380E has no benchmark scores in the database, so its real-world performance cannot be validated against the 8050S. Its fixed 2000 MHz clock, 6 GB dedicated GDDR6 memory with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 75 W TDP make it a self-contained discrete card, but the compute gap is too large to overcome. The 8050S also has a higher boost clock at 2800 MHz versus 2000 MHz, and a newer process node at 4 nm versus 6 nm.

For users selecting between these two based on the database, the AMD Radeon 8050S is the clear choice for raw compute performance, ray tracing capability, and overall benchmark standing. The Intel Arc A380E offers dedicated memory and a fixed clock, which may be relevant in systems where shared memory performance is uncertain, but the lack of benchmark data and the lower compute resources make it difficult to recommend for performance-sensitive tasks. The 8050S is active in production, while the A380E is end-of-life, further favoring the AMD part for longevity and support.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 8050S | Intel Arc A380E |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | Xe-HPG |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 6 nm |

| Die Size | 308 mm² | 157 mm² |

| Transistors | unknown | 7,200 million |

| Transistor Density | not listed | 45.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1295 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2800 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 6 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 96 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 186.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 128 | 64 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 32 | 8 |

| FP32 Performance | 11.47 TFLOPS | 4.096 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 11.47 TFLOPS (1:1) | 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| Pixel Rate | 179.2 GPixel/s | 64.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 358.4 GTexel/s | 128.0 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 55 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 2.0 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2024-03-31 |

| Predecessor | Polaris Mobile | Xe Graphics |

| Successor | none listed | Battlemage |

| Average Benchmark Score | 62108 | 0 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 89 | 50 |