AMD Radeon 880M vs Intel Arc A310 Comparison
AMD Radeon 880M
Arc A310
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: AMD Radeon 880M vs Intel Arc A310
The AMD Radeon 880M and Intel Arc A310 occupy similar performance tiers, but the data shows a clear and consistent winner. The 880M wins every single head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database, nine out of nine, and posts a higher average benchmark score of 8436 compared to the Arc A310's 7550. The 880M also sits at the 43rd percentile among all GPUs, while the Arc A310 sits at the 40th. For a low-power integrated graphics solution, the 880M is the superior choice for almost any use case. The Arc A310, a low-end discrete card, is now end-of-life and trails in every measured metric, often by significant margins. The 880M is the pick for portable devices where performance and efficiency matter; the Arc A310 only makes sense if you have a specific need for its dedicated memory and display outputs, as it is a single-slot card with four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs.
The Verdict
Benchmark results indicate that the AMD Radeon 880M is the definitive winner in this comparison. It leads in all nine head-to-head tests, with wins ranging from a marginal 2.2% in Geekbench OpenCL to a massive 121.2% in Passmark DirectX 11. The average benchmark score of 8436 for the 880M is 11.7% higher than the Arc A310's 7550. The 880M's percentile ranking of 43rd versus the Arc's 40th further confirms its overall edge.
The 880M is the clear choice for users building or buying a thin-and-light laptop with an integrated GPU. Its performance in the database is competitive with older discrete mobile GPUs, as shown by its nearest rivals including the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX and AMD Radeon R9 M375X. The Arc A310, while a discrete card, does not offer a performance advantage; it loses in every single test, including the compute-heavy Passmark GPU Compute where the 880M is 72.4% ahead. The Arc A310's only potential advantage is its fixed 4 GB of GDDR6 memory and dedicated display outputs, which are irrelevant for an IGP. The 880M is the practical pick. The Arc A310 is a niche product, now end-of-life, that cannot keep pace with the 880M.
FAQ
Q: Which GPU is faster, the AMD Radeon 880M or the Intel Arc A310?
A: The AMD Radeon 880M is faster. It wins 9 out of 9 head-to-head benchmarks in the database, with an average benchmark score of 8436 versus the Arc A310's 7550.
Q: How big is the performance gap between the two in gaming workloads?
A: The gap is significant. In the Passmark G3D test, the 880M scores 7615, which is 40.2% higher than the Arc A310's score of 5433. In DirectX 11, the 880M's score of 73 is 121.2% higher than the Arc's 33.
Q: Are there any tests where the Intel Arc A310 wins?
A: No. The database records no benchmark wins for the Intel Arc A310 against the AMD Radeon 880M. The 880M wins all recorded tests.
Q: How do these GPUs compare in compute performance?
A: The AMD Radeon 880M is substantially ahead. In the Passmark GPU Compute test, the 880M scores 3719, which is 72.4% higher than the Arc A310's 2157. The 880M also leads in Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 31285 versus 30607.
Q: What is the difference in their memory configurations?
A: The AMD Radeon 880M uses System Shared memory, meaning its bandwidth is system dependent. The Intel Arc A310 has a fixed 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 124.0 GB/s of dedicated bandwidth.
Q: Which GPU is better for a portable device?
A: The AMD Radeon 880M is the better choice. It has a TDP of 15 W, while the Arc A310 has a TDP of 30 W. The 880M is an IGP, or integrated graphics processor, while the Arc A310 is a single-slot card.
Architecture Differences
The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon 880M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) built on the Strix Point chip, using the RDNA 3.5 architecture. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC and is part of the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. This is a modern, high-density design with 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 145.9M per mm².
The Intel Arc A310 is a discrete, low-end graphics card based on the DG2-128 chip, using the Xe-HPG architecture. It belongs to the Alchemist generation, specifically the Arc 3 family. It is built on a larger 6 nm process at TSMC and has only 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving it a much lower transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The Arc A310 is marked as end-of-life, with its successor being Battlemage. The 880M is active in production.
The architectures also handle compute differently. The 880M has a 1:1 ratio for FP16 to FP32, with both rated at 4.454 TFLOPS. The Arc A310 has a 2:1 ratio, with FP32 at 2.688 TFLOPS and FP16 at 5.376 TFLOPS. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The 880M has 12 ray tracing cores, while the Arc A310 has 6.
Specification Differences
The core specifications reveal where each design focuses its resources. The AMD Radeon 880M has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster output units (ROPs). The Intel Arc A310 also has 768 shading units, but only 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs. This difference in TMUs contributes to the 880M's higher texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s compared to the Arc A310's 56.00 GTexel/s. The 880M also has a higher pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s versus the Arc's 28.00 GPixel/s.
Clock speeds are another major divider. The 880M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The Arc A310 runs at a flat 1750 MHz for both base and boost clocks. The 880M's memory is system shared, while the Arc A310 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 880M's memory bandwidth is listed as system dependent.
The power profiles are starkly different. The 880M has a TDP of 15 W and is an IGP with no power connectors. The Arc A310 has a TDP of 30 W, is a single-slot card, and also has no power connectors, but its suggested PSU is 200 W. The 880M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, as does the Arc A310. The Arc A310 has 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the 880M's display outputs are portable device dependent.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The head-to-head data is a clean sweep for the AMD Radeon 880M. In Geekbench Vulkan, the 880M scores 40006, a massive 38.1% lead over the Arc A310's 28964. This suggests the 880M has a significant advantage in Vulkan-based workloads. The Geekbench OpenCL test is closer, with the 880M scoring 31285 versus the Arc's 30607, a 2.2% lead.
The Passmark suite shows the 880M's dominance across different DirectX versions. In DirectX 9, the 880M scores 97, which is 40.6% higher than the Arc's 69. In DirectX 10, both score 31, a tie. The biggest gap is in DirectX 11, where the 880M scores 73, a staggering 121.2% higher than the Arc A310's 33. In DirectX 12, the 880M leads with a score of 32 versus 29, a 10.3% difference.
The 2D and compute tests reinforce the pattern. In Passmark G2D, the 880M scores 969, which is 55% higher than the Arc's 625. In Passmark G3D, the 880M scores 7615, a 40.2% lead over the Arc's 5433. The Passmark GPU Compute test shows the 880M at 3719, which is 72.4% higher than the Arc A310's 2157. The 880M's wins in these tests are not marginal; they are substantial and consistent.
Where Each One Wins
The AMD Radeon 880M wins in every recorded use case. For gaming, the 880M's DirectX 11 and DirectX 12 scores are far superior, with leads of 121.2% and 10.3% respectively. Its 40.2% lead in Passmark G3D indicates a strong advantage in general 3D rendering. For compute tasks, the 880M's 72.4% lead in GPU Compute and its higher Geekbench OpenCL score make it the clear choice for any GPGPU work. Its 55% lead in the 2D test also makes it better for general desktop and 2D acceleration tasks.
The Intel Arc A310 has no benchmark wins. Its only potential advantages are structural: it has a fixed 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, which can be beneficial if system memory is scarce, and it offers a dedicated single-slot form factor with four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, which provides a fixed set of display connectivity options. However, these features do not translate into any performance wins in the database. The data shows the 880M is faster in every single recorded test, making it the superior choice for any performance-sensitive application. The Arc A310's higher TDP of 30 W also makes it less efficient for the performance it delivers, further cementing the 880M's position as the better overall product for a portable device.