AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D vs Intel Arc A380E Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural differences between the AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D and the Intel Arc A380E?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D uses the Navi 48 chip based on RDNA 4.0 architecture, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc A380E uses the DG2-128 chip based on Xe-HPG architecture, built on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. The AMD part belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi IV Series) generation, while the Intel part is from the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare between these two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D has 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth and memory clocked at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The Intel Arc A380E has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth and memory clocked at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective).

Q: What is the power requirement difference between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D has a TDP of 150 W and requires a 450 W suggested PSU with a single 16-pin power connector. The Intel Arc A380E has a TDP of 75 W and requires a 250 W suggested PSU, with no power connectors needed as it draws power entirely from the slot.

Q: What display outputs does each card provide?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D provides a single DisplayPort 2.1a output. The Intel Arc A380E provides four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs.

Q: What is the production status and release timing for each product?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D is listed as Active production and was released on December 10, 2025. The Intel Arc A380E is listed as End-of-life production and was released on March 31, 2024. The Intel part has a successor named Battlemage, while the AMD part lists no successor.

Q: How do the two cards differ in their FP16 compute capabilities?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D delivers 24.82 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio to FP32. The Intel Arc A380E delivers 8.192 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 throughput is double its FP32 throughput of 4.096 TFLOPS.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows a clear separation of use cases based on the raw specifications. The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D dominates in every category of raw compute throughput. Its FP32 performance of 24.82 TFLOPS is approximately six times the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc A380E. The pixel rate of 193.9 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s gives the AMD card more than three times the fill rate. Texture rate follows the same pattern, with 387.8 GTexel/s against 128.0 GTexel/s.

The memory capacity difference is the most dramatic split. The AMD card carries 32 GB of GDDR6, which is more than five times the 6 GB on the Intel card. Combined with a 256-bit bus versus 96-bit, the AMD card achieves 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth, roughly three times the 186.0 GB/s of the Intel part. This positions the AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D for workloads with large working sets, such as high-resolution rendering, AI inference with large models, or multi-application compute environments. The Intel Arc A380E, with its 6 GB frame buffer and 75 W TDP, fits into compact or power-constrained systems where the four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs and slot-only power delivery are advantages.

The Intel card wins on physical integration flexibility. It requires no external power connectors, has a 250 W suggested PSU, and its 254 mm length, 127 mm height, and 20 mm width are comparable to the AMD card's 241 mm by 111 mm by 19 mm dimensions. Both are single-slot designs. The Intel card also offers four display outputs versus a single output on the AMD card, which makes it more suitable for multi-display signage or digital signage deployments. The AMD card's single DisplayPort 2.1a output, while newer in version, limits physical display count without additional hardware.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D is built on the Navi 48 chip using RDNA 4.0 architecture. It uses a 4 nm process at TSMC and packs 53,900 million transistors into a 357 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 151.0M per mm². The Intel Arc A380E uses the DG2-128 chip with Xe-HPG architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, with a density of 45.9M per mm². The AMD chip is roughly seven and a half times larger in transistor count and more than twice the die area.

The compute resource allocation differs substantially. The AMD card has 3072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, 96 raster operations pipelines, and 48 ray tracing cores. The Intel card has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. In every category, the AMD card has exactly three times the units of the Intel card for shading, TMUs, and ROPs, and six times the ray tracing cores.

FP16 processing reveals a fundamental architectural difference. The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning both formats deliver 24.82 TFLOPS. The Intel Arc A380E runs FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, delivering 8.192 TFLOPS FP16 against 4.096 TFLOPS FP32. This indicates the AMD architecture treats FP16 and FP32 with equal throughput, while the Intel architecture doubles FP16 rate relative to FP32.

The memory architecture also differs in clock strategy. The AMD card runs its memory at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate, while the Intel card runs at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective. The AMD card uses a 256-bit bus, the Intel card a 96-bit bus. The combined effect produces the large bandwidth gap already noted.

The bus interface differs as well. The AMD card uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Intel card uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The AMD card's interface provides more lanes and a newer standard, which matters for data transfer between the GPU and host system in compute workloads. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so the API feature set is identical at the version level.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measured specification. The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D has a base clock of 1080 MHz and a boost clock of 2020 MHz, with a game clock of 1080 MHz. The Intel Arc A380E has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz, with no game clock listed. The AMD card's boost clock is only 20 MHz higher than the Intel card's fixed clock, but the AMD base clock is substantially lower.

Memory size differs by a factor of more than five: 32 GB on the AMD card versus 6 GB on the Intel card. Both use GDDR6, but the bus widths are 256-bit and 96-bit respectively. Memory bandwidth is 576.0 GB/s versus 186.0 GB/s.

The transistor counts differ by a factor of roughly 7.5: 53,900 million versus 7,200 million. Die size is 357 mm² versus 157 mm². Transistor density is 151.0M per mm² versus 45.9M per mm². Process nodes are 4 nm versus 6 nm.

Power delivery is a major differentiator. The AMD card has a 150 W TDP, requires a 450 W suggested PSU, and uses a single 16-pin power connector. The Intel card has a 75 W TDP, requires a 250 W suggested PSU, and uses no power connectors. Both are single-slot designs, but the AMD card is physically smaller: 241 mm length, 111 mm height, and 19 mm width versus the Intel card's 254 mm length, 127 mm height, and 20 mm width.

Display outputs differ in count and version. The AMD card has one DisplayPort 2.1a output. The Intel card has four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. Production status differs: the AMD card is Active, the Intel card is End-of-life. Release dates are December 10, 2025 for the AMD part and March 31, 2024 for the Intel part. The Intel card has a successor, Battlemage, while the AMD card lists none. The Intel card's predecessor is Xe Graphics, while the AMD card's predecessor is Radeon Pro Vega.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark entries for these two products, and neither card has individual benchmark scores or nearest rival data in the current records. Both cards sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 0 for each. This means the comparison must rely entirely on the specification-level data recorded in the database.

The FP32 compute comparison is the clearest signal. The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D delivers 24.82 TFLOPS, which is approximately six times the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc A380E. In FP16, the AMD card's 24.82 TFLOPS is roughly three times the Intel card's 8.192 TFLOPS. The AMD card's FP16 and FP32 rates are identical, confirming a 1:1 architecture, while the Intel card's FP16 rate doubles its FP32 rate, confirming a 2:1 architecture.

Pixel throughput shows a similar ratio. The AMD card's 193.9 GPixel/s is approximately three times the Intel card's 64.00 GPixel/s. Texture rate follows the same pattern: 387.8 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s, again a threefold difference. These ratios align with the threefold difference in shading units, TMUs, and ROPs between the two cards.

Memory bandwidth is the other major gap. The AMD card's 576.0 GB/s is approximately three times the Intel card's 186.0 GB/s. The memory clock difference is smaller: 2250 MHz versus 1937 MHz, which is roughly a 16% advantage for the AMD card. The bandwidth gap is driven primarily by the bus width difference of 256-bit versus 96-bit.

The power efficiency comparison is informative. The AMD card produces 24.82 TFLOPS FP32 at 150 W TDP, while the Intel card produces 4.096 TFLOPS at 75 W TDP. Per watt, the AMD card delivers roughly 0.165 TFLOPS per watt, while the Intel card delivers roughly 0.055 TFLOPS per watt. The AMD card is approximately three times more efficient in FP32 throughput per watt, despite consuming twice the power. The same pattern holds for memory bandwidth per watt: 576.0 GB/s at 150 W versus 186.0 GB/s at 75 W, giving the AMD card roughly 3.84 GB/s per watt against 2.48 GB/s per watt for the Intel card.

The physical comparison shows the Intel card is slightly larger in every dimension: 254 mm versus 241 mm in length, 127 mm versus 111 mm in height, and 20 mm versus 19 mm in width. The AMD card achieves higher performance in a smaller physical footprint, while the Intel card requires no power connectors and a lower suggested PSU of 250 W versus 450 W. The Intel card's four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs give it a multi-display advantage, while the AMD card's single DisplayPort 2.1a output offers the newer interface version.