AMD Radeon 820M vs Intel Arc A310E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Radeon 820M versus the Intel Arc A310E. Both entries show zero benchmark scores, zero wins for either side, and no nearest rival comparisons. The absence of measured data means a comparative performance analysis must rely on the architectural and specification differences documented in the database.

The AMD Radeon 820M operates with a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2800 MHz. The Intel Arc A310E holds a fixed clock of 2000 MHz for both base and boost. The AMD part delivers a pixel rate of 11.20 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 22.40 GTexel/s. The Intel part produces a pixel rate of 32.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 64.00 GTexel/s. In raw throughput terms, the Arc A310E shows roughly 2.86 times the pixel throughput and 2.86 times the texture throughput of the Radeon 820M. These ratios follow directly from the recorded rates.

The FP32 compute figures widen the gap further. The Radeon 820M achieves 716.8 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Arc A310E reaches 3.072 TFLOPS, which is 4.29 times higher. In FP16, the Radeon 820M maintains a 1:1 ratio with its FP32 output at 716.8 GFLOPS. The Arc A310E uses a 2:1 FP16-to-FP32 ratio, giving it 6.144 TFLOPS of FP16 throughput, which is 8.57 times the AMD part’s FP16 result.

The Intel Arc A310E also holds a decisive advantage in memory resources. It comes with 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 820M relies entirely on system shared memory, with its bandwidth marked as system dependent. The Intel part’s memory clock runs at 1937 MHz, which translates to 15.5 Gbps effective. The AMD part has no dedicated memory clock because it shares system memory.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level feature parity is identical in the database. The Radeon 820M includes 2 ray tracing cores, while the Arc A310E includes 6. Neither product lists tensor cores.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 820M is built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture and belongs to the Navi III IGP generation, specifically the Strix Point Mobile lineup. Its chip is identified as Krackan Point 2. The manufacturing process is 4 nm at TSMC. The database does not list a transistor count or die size for this part.

The Intel Arc A310E uses the Xe-HPG architecture from the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. Its chip is DG2-128. The process node is 6 nm, also at TSMC. Intel’s part has a documented transistor count of 7,200 million and a die size of 157 mm², yielding a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The AMD part’s transistor density is not recorded.

The core configurations differ substantially. The Radeon 820M has 128 shading units, 8 texture mapping units, and 4 render output units. The Arc A310E has 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. That is 6 times the shading units, 4 times the TMUs, and 4 times the ROPs for the Intel part. The AMD part uses 2 ray tracing cores versus 6 for Intel, a 3-to-1 ratio.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. The AMD Radeon 820M uses system shared memory for both capacity and type, with a system shared bus width and system dependent bandwidth. This means its performance scales with the host system’s memory configuration. The Intel Arc A310E has a fixed 4 GB GDDR6 pool with a 64-bit bus and a constant 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. This gives Intel’s part predictable memory performance independent of the host platform.

Power and physical design also separate the two. The Radeon 820M is an integrated graphics processor with a 15 W TDP, no slot width beyond IGP, and no power connectors. The Arc A310E is a discrete single-slot card with a 75 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU rating of 250 W. Its physical dimensions are recorded as 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width.

The bus interface is identical: both use PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs differ, with the AMD part listed as portable device dependent and the Intel part offering 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0.

Release timing and production status vary. The AMD Radeon 820M was released on 2025-02-28 and remains active in production. Its predecessor is listed as Navi II IGP. The Intel Arc A310E was released on 2024-03-31 and is marked end-of-life. Its predecessor is Xe Graphics, and its successor is Battlemage.

The Radeon 820M’s FP16 ratio of 1:1 indicates it processes FP16 at the same rate as FP32. The Arc A310E’s 2:1 ratio means its FP16 throughput is double its FP32 throughput. This architectural choice affects workloads that can exploit reduced precision.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A310E wins in every measured throughput category recorded in the database. Its FP32 output of 3.072 TFLOPS is 4.29 times the Radeon 820M’s 716.8 GFLOPS. Its FP16 output of 6.144 TFLOPS is 8.57 times higher. Pixel fill rate favors Intel at 32.00 GPixel/s versus 11.20 GPixel/s. Texture fill rate favors Intel at 64.00 GTexel/s versus 22.40 GTexel/s.

The Arc A310E also wins on memory determinism. Its dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth provides a fixed performance envelope. The Radeon 820M’s system shared memory has no fixed bandwidth figure, which introduces variability depending on the host system’s memory speed and configuration.

Ray tracing capability favors Intel as well, with 6 ray tracing cores versus 2. While the database does not include ray tracing benchmark scores, the core count difference indicates a higher theoretical capacity for ray-traced workloads.

The AMD Radeon 820M wins on power efficiency. Its 15 W TDP is one-fifth of the Arc A310E’s 75 W TDP. For systems where power draw is a primary constraint, the Radeon 820M offers a significantly lower thermal and electrical footprint. The AMD part is also an IGP, meaning it requires no additional card slot, no power connectors, and no PSU upgrade beyond what a typical laptop or compact system already provides.

The Radeon 820M also wins on process technology. Its 4 nm node is smaller than Intel’s 6 nm node, which typically allows higher transistor density and lower power consumption per unit of performance. The database does not record the AMD part’s transistor count, so a direct density comparison is not possible.

Clock behavior favors AMD in maximum boost terms. The Radeon 820M boosts to 2800 MHz, which is 40% higher than the Arc A310E’s fixed 2000 MHz. However, the Intel part’s higher core count more than compensates for its lower clock in aggregate throughput.

The Intel Arc A310E wins on form factor flexibility for desktop integration. It is a single-slot card with standard dimensions and four display outputs. The Radeon 820M is tied to a portable device’s integrated design, with display outputs dependent on the specific laptop or mini PC implementation.

The Radeon 820M wins on production status. It is active, while the Arc A310E is end-of-life. This means the AMD part remains available for new designs, whereas the Intel part is being phased out in favor of Battlemage.

The Verdict

The database presents a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Arc A310E dominates in compute throughput, memory bandwidth, and fixed resources. Its FP32 performance of 3.072 TFLOPS is more than four times the Radeon 820M’s. Its FP16 performance of 6.144 TFLOPS is more than eight times higher. Its dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 memory with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth eliminates the variability inherent in the Radeon 820M’s system shared memory approach.

The Radeon 820M’s advantages are limited to power efficiency and process node. At 15 W TDP, it consumes one-fifth the power of the Arc A310E’s 75 W. Its 4 nm process is two generations ahead of the 6 nm node used by Intel. For fanless designs, thin-and-light laptops, or battery-powered devices, the AMD part offers a viable integrated graphics solution with modern API support.

For workloads that demand raw graphics throughput, the Arc A310E is the stronger choice based on recorded specifications. Its 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs provide a foundation for higher resolution rendering and more complex scenes. The 124.0 GB/s memory bandwidth supports texture-heavy workloads that would strain a shared memory implementation.

For workloads that prioritize portability, low power draw, and minimal thermal output, the Radeon 820M fits better. Its 15 W TDP allows integration into compact systems where a 75 W discrete card cannot fit. Its 2800 MHz boost clock provides responsive performance for light graphics tasks, and its RDNA 3.5 architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate features.

The Arc A310E’s end-of-life status is a practical consideration. New system designs may prefer the active Radeon 820M, despite its lower performance, to ensure long-term availability. The Intel part’s successor, Battlemage, suggests Intel is moving on from this generation.

The database shows no direct benchmark scores, so these conclusions derive entirely from the recorded architectural specifications and throughput rates. The performance gaps are large enough that even without measured benchmarks, the relative positioning is clear.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 4.29 times the AMD Radeon 820M’s 716.8 GFLOPS.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 820M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M has a 15 W TDP, while the Intel Arc A310E has a 75 W TDP. The Intel part also lists a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has 6 ray tracing cores, while the AMD Radeon 820M has 2.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M is active, while the Intel Arc A310E is end-of-life. The Arc A310E’s successor is listed as Battlemage.