AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S vs Intel Arc Pro A60M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S versus the Intel Arc Pro A60M. Both products have empty benchmark arrays, zero wins each, and identical percentile standings at 50. This means the comparison must rely entirely on the technical specifications and architectural capabilities recorded for each unit.

The raw compute data shows a decisive scale difference. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S delivers 47.84 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the Intel Arc Pro A60M produces 5.325 TFLOPS. This places the AMD part roughly 9 times higher in raw single-precision compute. In FP16, the AMD card maintains 47.84 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, whereas the Intel part reaches 10.65 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio. The AMD card still holds a substantial lead, but the Intel part's FP16 advantage over its own FP32 number is notable, indicating a different execution strategy for reduced-precision workloads.

Pixel throughput follows the same pattern. The AMD R9700S records 373.8 GPixel/s, compared to 83.20 GPixel/s for the Arc Pro A60M, a factor of approximately 4.5. Texture rate shows 747.5 GTexel/s versus 166.4 GTexel/s, again a similar margin. These figures indicate the AMD card processes geometry and rasterization work at a much higher rate, which would translate directly into higher frame rates in graphics-bound tasks.

Memory bandwidth is another area of clear separation. The R9700S uses a 256-bit bus with 32 GB of GDDR6 memory and achieves 644.6 GB/s. The Arc Pro A60M uses a 128-bit bus with 8 GB of GDDR6 and reaches 256.0 GB/s. The AMD part has 2.5 times the bandwidth and 4 times the capacity. Memory clock rates differ as well: the R9700S runs at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective), while the Intel part runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective).

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S wins in every measured compute category recorded in the database. Its 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs dwarf the Intel part's 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The ray tracing hardware follows suit: 64 RT cores on the AMD side versus 16 on the Intel side. Any workload that scales with shader count, texture units, or ray tracing cores will favor the AMD card.

The AMD card also wins on clock speeds. Its base clock of 1660 MHz and boost clock of 2920 MHz far exceed the Intel part's 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost. The AMD card's game clock is listed at 2350 MHz, which is still well above the Intel part's maximum boost. Higher clocks combined with more execution units create a compounding advantage in throughput.

The Intel Arc Pro A60M wins in the mobility and integration categories, though these are not raw performance metrics. It is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a 95 W TDP, while the AMD card is a dual-slot add-in board with a 300 W TDP. The Intel part requires no power connectors and has no suggested PSU rating, whereas the AMD card requires a 1x 16-pin connector and a 700 W suggested PSU. For systems where power delivery and physical space are constrained, the Intel part is the only feasible option.

The Intel part also has a longer availability window, with a release date of 2025-12-10 for the AMD card versus 2023-06-05 for the Intel part. This does not affect performance but indicates the AMD product is newer to the market.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S uses the Navi 48 chip built on RDNA 4.0 architecture, part of the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi IV Series) generation. The Intel Arc Pro A60M uses the DG2-256 chip based on Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist (Pro-Series Mobile) generation.

Manufacturing processes differ significantly. The AMD chip is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel chip uses a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. The AMD chip packs 53,900 million transistors onto a 357 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 151.0M per mm². The Intel chip contains 11,500 million transistors on a 269 mm² die, with a density of 42.8M per mm². The AMD chip has nearly 4.7 times the transistor count on a die that is only about 33% larger.

Memory architecture differs in both quantity and bus configuration. The AMD card uses 32 GB of GDDR6 across a 256-bit interface. The Intel part uses 8 GB of GDDR6 across a 128-bit interface. The AMD card's memory clock of 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective) is higher than the Intel part's 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). These factors combine to produce the bandwidth gap already noted.

API support is identical for both parts. Each supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. There are no recorded differences in API feature sets. The bus interface does differ: the AMD card uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Intel part uses PCIe 4.0 x16. This gives the AMD card twice the theoretical host bandwidth, which matters for data transfer in compute workloads.

The FP16 execution ratio highlights an architectural difference. The AMD card executes FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning it does not gain throughput by reducing precision. The Intel part executes at a 2:1 ratio, doubling its FP16 output relative to FP32. This suggests the Intel architecture is optimized for reduced-precision workloads, while the AMD card treats both precisions equally.

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a one-sided performance comparison. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S leads in every compute metric, memory metric, and architectural resource count documented in the database. Its FP32 throughput is approximately 9 times higher, its pixel rate is approximately 4.5 times higher, and its memory bandwidth is 2.5 times higher. Its transistor count is nearly 4.7 times higher, and it operates on a more advanced 4 nm process versus 6 nm.

The Intel Arc Pro A60M has no performance advantage in any recorded benchmark category. Its only wins are in power envelope and integration: 95 W TDP versus 300 W, IGP form factor versus dual-slot, no power connector requirement versus a 1x 16-pin connector, and no suggested PSU versus a 700 W suggested PSU. For systems that cannot accommodate a large, power-hungry add-in card, the Intel part is the only choice. For any task that involves rendering, compute, or memory-intensive workloads, the AMD card dominates according to the specifications.

Neither product has recorded benchmark scores, average scores, or nearest rivals in the database. The percentile ranking for both is 50, which reflects the absence of measured data rather than actual performance parity. The specification sheet is the only basis for comparison, and it is unambiguous in its verdict.

The launch dates differ by over two years, with the Intel part released on 2023-06-05 and the AMD part on 2025-12-10. The AMD card lists a predecessor, Radeon Pro Vega, while the Intel part has no recorded predecessor. Neither product has a successor listed. No launch MSRP is recorded for either product.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S delivers 47.84 TFLOPS, compared to 5.325 TFLOPS for the Intel Arc Pro A60M.

Q: How do the memory capacities compare?

A: The AMD card has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, while the Intel part has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The AMD card has a 300 W TDP, requires a 1x 16-pin power connector, and suggests a 700 W PSU. The Intel part has a 95 W TDP, requires no power connectors, and lists no suggested PSU.

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 uses a more advanced manufacturing process?

A: The AMD card uses a 4 nm process, while the Intel part uses a 6 nm process. Both are fabricated at TSMC.

Q: What is the form factor of each GPU?

A: The AMD card is a dual-slot add-in board measuring 267 mm in length, 109 mm in height, and 39 mm in width. The Intel part is classified as an IGP with no recorded dimensions.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S | Intel Arc Pro A60M |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 4.0 | Xe-HPG |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 53,900 million | 11,500 million |

| Die Size | 357 mm² | 269 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 151.0M / mm² | 42.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1660 MHz | 900 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2920 MHz | 1300 MHz |

| Memory Size | 32 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 644.6 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4096 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 256 | 128 |

| ROPs | 128 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 64 | 16 |

| FP32 Performance | 47.84 TFLOPS | 5.325 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 47.84 TFLOPS (1:1) | 10.65 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| Pixel Rate | 373.8 GPixel/s | 83.20 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 747.5 GTexel/s | 166.4 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 300 W | 95 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | None |

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

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1a | Portable Device Dependent |

| Release Date | 2025-12-10 | 2023-06-05 |