AMD Radeon 840M vs Intel Arc A380E x2 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Radeon 840M against the Intel Arc A380E x2. The winsA and winsB fields are both zero, and the headToHeadBenchmarks array is empty. This absence of comparative data means the two GPUs cannot be ranked against each other through direct measurements in this database.

What the database does provide is a percentile ranking for each part. Both the AMD Radeon 840M and the Intel Arc A380E x2 hold a percentileVsAllGpus score of 50. This indicates that, in the absence of direct comparisons, each unit sits at the midpoint of all GPUs tracked by the database. The identical percentile suggests a rough parity in overall standing, but it does not substitute for actual head-to-head testing.

The theoretical specifications, however, hint at a significant performance gap. The Intel Arc A380E x2 delivers 4.096 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the AMD Radeon 840M manages 1,484.8 GFLOPS (1.4848 TFLOPS). That places the Intel part at approximately 2.76 times the raw FP32 throughput of the AMD part. The pixel rate tells a similar story: the Arc A380E x2 reaches 64.00 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s for the Radeon 840M, a factor of roughly 2.76 again. Texture rate follows the same pattern, with 128.0 GTexel/s against 46.40 GTexel/s, exactly the same ratio.

These are not benchmark scores but derived specifications. Still, they point to a hardware design where Intel's discrete GPU holds a clear mathematical advantage in every throughput metric listed. The Radeon 840M counters with a much higher boost clock of 2900 MHz versus a fixed 2000 MHz for the Intel part, and a more modern 4 nm process versus 6 nm. Clock speed alone cannot bridge a shading unit count of 256 versus 1024, nor a TMU count of 16 versus 64, nor an ROP count of 8 versus 32.

The memory subsystem amplifies the difference. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, delivering 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 840M relies on system shared memory with bandwidth listed as system dependent. Without a dedicated memory pool, the AMD part's effective bandwidth will vary with the host system's memory configuration, but it cannot match a dedicated 186.0 GB/s GDDR6 implementation in any realistic scenario.

Ray tracing resources also favor Intel. The Arc A380E x2 contains 8 RT cores, while the Radeon 840M has 4. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature parity exists, but the hardware dedicated to ray tracing is doubled on the Intel side.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Arc A380E x2 is the stronger GPU on paper. Every compute, pixel, texture, and memory bandwidth metric in the database favors Intel by a wide margin. The FP32 throughput is nearly three times higher, the pixel rate is nearly three times higher, and the dedicated memory bandwidth is a fixed 186.0 GB/s against a system-dependent figure for AMD.

The AMD Radeon 840M, however, is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 15 W TDP, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 is a single-slot discrete card with a 130 W TDP and a 1x 6-pin power connector. The power envelope difference is substantial: 15 W versus 130 W. A user choosing between these two parts is not comparing like for like. The Radeon 840M is designed for portable devices where power draw is a primary constraint, while the Arc A380E x2 is a standalone card requiring a 300 W suggested PSU and a 265 mm length slot.

For anyone building a system with room for a discrete card and the power budget to feed it, the Intel part is the clear choice based on the recorded specifications. For an ultraportable or embedded design where the GPU must share power with the CPU and fit on the motherboard, the Radeon 840M is the only option that fits the form factor.

The production status also differs. The Intel Arc A380E x2 is listed as end-of-life with a successor named Battlemage. The AMD Radeon 840M is active, with a release date of 2025-02-28, several months after the Intel part's 2024-03-31 release. The Intel part's predecessor is Xe Graphics, while the Radeon 840M's predecessor is Navi II IGP.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 840M wins in integration and efficiency. It is an IGP with no slot width, no power connectors, and a 15 W TDP. It uses system shared memory, which eliminates the need for separate VRAM and reduces system cost and complexity. Its boost clock of 2900 MHz is the highest clock figure in either specification set, and its 4 nm process node is two generations ahead of Intel's 6 nm. For a thin-and-light laptop or a low-power embedded system, the Radeon 840M is the only realistic option given the Intel part's 130 W TDP and physical dimensions.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 wins in raw throughput and memory. It has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 RT cores. It uses 6 GB of GDDR6 with a 96-bit bus and 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its FP32 compute of 4.096 TFLOPS and FP16 compute of 8.192 TFLOPS dwarf the Radeon 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS for both formats (the Radeon runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, while Intel runs it at 2:1). The Intel card also provides 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the AMD IGP's display outputs are portable device dependent, meaning the manufacturer decides what ports to include.

The RT core count doubles Intel's ray tracing capacity. The 64.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 128.0 GTexel/s texture rate are roughly 2.76 times the AMD figures. The Intel part also has a fixed base and boost clock of 2000 MHz, so it does not rely on thermal headroom to reach its rated performance; the AMD part's 2900 MHz boost is a maximum that depends on cooling and power delivery in the host device.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 delivers 4.096 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the AMD Radeon 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS. The Intel part is approximately 2.76 times higher.

Q: What is the memory configuration for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 840M uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth figure.

Q: How do the power requirements differ?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has a 15 W TDP and requires no power connectors. The Intel Arc A380E x2 has a 130 W TDP, uses a 1x 6-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 300 W.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

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

Q: What is the production status of each part?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M is active with a release date of 2025-02-28. The Intel Arc A380E x2 is end-of-life with a release date of 2024-03-31 and a successor named Battlemage.

Q: How many ray tracing cores does each GPU have?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 has 8 RT cores, while the AMD Radeon 840M has 4 RT cores.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon 840M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm process, fabricated by TSMC. It belongs to the Navi III IGP generation and uses the Krackan Point chip. This is an integrated design where the GPU shares the system memory and depends on the host platform for power and cooling. The architecture is optimized for efficiency within a 15 W TDP, and the FP16 to FP32 ratio is 1:1, meaning both formats execute at the same rate.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm process, also from TSMC. It is part of the Alchemist generation (Arc 3) and uses the DG2-128 chip. The transistor count is 7,200 million on a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The FP16 to FP32 ratio is 2:1, meaning FP16 throughput is double the FP32 rate. This is a discrete GPU with its own 6 GB GDDR6 memory and a 130 W TDP. The design prioritizes raw throughput over power efficiency.

The Radeon 840M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The Arc A380E x2 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Both use PCIe 4.0 x8 as the bus interface, but the Radeon is an IGP, so it does not occupy a slot, while the Arc card is single-slot with dimensions of 265 mm by 127 mm by 20 mm. The Intel card provides 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs; the AMD IGP's display outputs are portable device dependent.

The memory clock differs significantly. The Arc A380E x2 runs its GDDR6 at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective speed. The Radeon 840M's memory clock is listed as system shared, meaning it depends entirely on the host system's RAM speed. The base and boost clocks also diverge: the Radeon runs at 400 MHz base and 2900 MHz boost, while the Arc runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification field recorded in the database. The AMD Radeon 840M uses a 4 nm process; the Intel Arc A380E x2 uses a 6 nm process. The Intel part has a known transistor count of 7,200 million and die size of 157 mm²; the AMD part lists both as unknown. The Radeon 840M has a base clock of 400 MHz and boost clock of 2900 MHz; the Arc A380E x2 has a fixed clock of 2000 MHz for both base and boost. The Radeon's memory is system shared; the Arc uses 6 GB of GDDR6 at 1937 MHz with a 96-bit bus and 186.0 GB/s bandwidth.

The shading unit count is 256 for AMD versus 1024 for Intel. TMUs are 16 versus 64. ROPs are 8 versus 32. RT cores are 4 versus 8. Pixel rate is 23.20 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 46.40 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 1,484.8 GFLOPS versus 4.096 TFLOPS. FP16 compute is 1,484.8 GFLOPS (1:1) versus 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1).

The TDP is 15 W for AMD versus 130 W for Intel. The AMD part is an IGP with no slot width and no power connectors. The Intel part is single-slot, requires a 1x 6-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 300 W. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for both. Display outputs are portable device dependent for AMD, while Intel provides 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0. The AMD part has no dimensions listed; the Intel card measures 265 mm in length, 127 mm in height, and 20 mm in width.

Production status differs: AMD is active, Intel is end-of-life. Release dates are 2025-02-28 for AMD and 2024-03-31 for Intel. The AMD predecessor is Navi II IGP; the Intel predecessor is Xe Graphics. The Intel successor is Battlemage; the AMD successor is null. Neither part has a launch MSRP recorded in the database.