AMD Radeon Pro 5300M vs Intel Arc A380 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison between the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M and the Intel Arc A380 is lopsided in favor of Intel. Out of nine benchmark tests, the Arc A380 wins eight, while the Radeon Pro 5300M takes only one. The margin of victory varies widely by test type, with the largest gaps appearing in compute-oriented workloads.

The most decisive Intel win comes in DirectX 12, where the Arc A380 scores 35 against the Radeon Pro 5300M's 25. That is a 28.6% advantage, the largest percentage delta in the entire comparison. This is a significant gap for a modern graphics API, suggesting the Intel architecture handles the lower-level draw calls and resource binding more efficiently. The Vulkan test tells a similar story: Intel posts 36736 to AMD's 27912, a 24% difference. OpenCL also favors Intel heavily, with 38224 versus 29252, a 23.5% lead. These three results indicate a consistent pattern: the Arc A380 is substantially stronger in general-purpose and modern-API compute workloads.

The DirectX 10 and DirectX 11 results are much closer. Intel wins DirectX 10 with 37 against 36, a mere 2.7% margin. DirectX 11 shows 38 versus 37, a 2.6% edge for Intel. These are effectively statistical ties, indicating that in older, fixed-function-heavy rendering paths, the two cards perform nearly identically. The same near-parity appears in the GPU compute test, where Intel's 2762 edges out AMD's 2658 by 3.8%. The G2D test, which measures 2D graphics performance, gives Intel a 610 to 582 win, a 4.6% difference. The G3D test, a general 3D graphics score, shows Intel ahead at 6252 versus 5918, a 5.3% gap.

The single AMD victory comes in DirectX 9, where the Radeon Pro 5300M scores 80 against the Arc A380's 73. That is a 9.6% advantage for AMD, the only test where the older architecture demonstrates a clear superiority. This is notable because DirectX 9 is a legacy API, and the result suggests that AMD's driver implementation for older titles retains an edge, or that the Intel hardware struggles with the older shader model. The win is isolated, however, and does not offset the broader trend.

Looking at the aggregate average benchmark scores, the Radeon Pro 5300M averages 10013 across all recorded tests, while the Arc A380 averages 8558. This is an interesting inversion: despite winning eight of nine head-to-head tests, Intel's overall average is lower. This discrepancy stems from the fact that the average includes tests not present in the head-to-head set, such as Geekbench Metal (where AMD scores 33626) and 3DMark Steel Nomad (where Intel scores 808). The Metal test is exclusive to AMD, and it is a high score that pulls the average up. The Arc A380's percentile ranking is 44 against all GPUs, while the Radeon Pro 5300M sits at 48, meaning AMD's card ranks slightly higher in the global distribution despite losing most direct comparisons.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380 is the clear winner for anyone prioritizing modern graphics APIs and compute-heavy workloads. Its DirectX 12 lead of 28.6% over the Radeon Pro 5300M is the standout result, making it the better choice for applications that leverage DX12 features. The Vulkan and OpenCL margins of 24% and 23.5% respectively reinforce this, showing that Intel's Xe-HPG architecture is more capable in raw compute and cross-platform graphics. The Arc A380 also wins in DirectX 10, DirectX 11, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute, albeit by smaller margins ranging from 2.6% to 5.3%. For a user running a mix of modern titles, productivity applications with GPU acceleration, or compute tasks like OpenCL-based rendering, the data consistently points to Intel.

The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M wins only in DirectX 9, with a 9.6% margin. This makes it the preferable option for legacy software or older games that rely on DirectX 9 rendering paths. The result is not trivial: a 9.6% performance advantage in that specific API could translate to smoother frame rates in older titles that many users still play. However, this is a narrow use case. The Radeon Pro 5300M also holds a higher global percentile (48 versus 44) and a higher average benchmark score (10013 versus 8558), driven largely by its strong Geekbench Metal score of 33626. For users in Apple's ecosystem, particularly those running Metal-based applications on macOS, the Radeon Pro 5300M is the only one of the two with a Metal score recorded, making it the de facto choice for that environment.

The data also shows that the Radeon Pro 5300M is closer to its nearest rivals than the Arc A380 is to its own. AMD's nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M, scores 10043, a delta of -0.3%, meaning the two are essentially tied. The Arc A380's nearest rival, the AMD FirePro W5170M, scores 8595, a delta of -0.4%, also a near tie. However, the Radeon Pro 5300M sits just 0.5% ahead of the GeForce GTX 870M and 1.7% ahead of the Quadro 6000, while the Arc A380 is 1.1% ahead of the Radeon HD 8870M and 1.4% ahead of the Radeon 880M. These figures show that both cards are competitive within their respective performance tiers, but the Intel card's head-to-head wins over AMD are not reflected in its closest rival comparisons.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M has an average benchmark score of 10013, while the Intel Arc A380 averages 8558. This places the AMD card at the 48th percentile of all GPUs, compared to Intel's 44th percentile.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest gap is in the DirectX 12 test, where the Intel Arc A380 scores 35 against the Radeon Pro 5300M's 25, a 28.6% advantage for Intel.

Q: In which test does the AMD card win?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M wins the DirectX 9 test, scoring 80 versus the Intel Arc A380's 73, a 9.6% margin.

Q: How do the two cards compare in OpenCL compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc A380 scores 38224 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M scores 29252. Intel leads by 23.5%.

Q: Does the AMD card have any unique benchmark results?

A: Yes, the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M has a Geekbench Metal score of 33626, which is not recorded for the Intel Arc A380. This indicates AMD's card is tested for Metal, a graphics API used in Apple platforms.

Q: How close are the DirectX 10 and DirectX 11 scores?

A: They are very close. Intel wins DirectX 10 with 37 versus 36 (2.7% difference) and DirectX 11 with 38 versus 37 (2.6% difference), making these effectively tied results.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every core specification. The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M is built on a 7 nm process, while the Intel Arc A380 uses a 6 nm node, both from TSMC. The transistor counts are close: AMD packs 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, while Intel has 7,200 million on a 157 mm² die. This gives Intel a higher transistor density of 45.9M per mm² versus AMD's 40.5M per mm².

Clock speeds favor Intel substantially. The Arc A380 has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2050 MHz, while the Radeon Pro 5300M runs at 1000 MHz base and 1250 MHz boost. Memory clocks differ as well: Intel's memory runs at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective, while AMD's runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective. Memory capacity and bus width also differ. AMD has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, yielding 186.0 GB/s. Despite the smaller bus, Intel's higher memory clock nearly closes the bandwidth gap.

Compute unit counts are different. The Radeon Pro 5300M has 1280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation units. The Arc A380 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Despite fewer shading units, Intel achieves higher throughput: 4.198 TFLOPS FP32 versus AMD's 3.200 TFLOPS, and 8.397 TFLOPS FP16 versus AMD's 6.400 TFLOPS. Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern: Intel posts 65.60 GPixel/s and 131.2 GTexel/s, while AMD posts 40.00 GPixel/s and 100.0 GTexel/s.

Power and physical specifications differ. The Radeon Pro 5300M has a TDP of 85 W, while the Arc A380 is rated at 75 W. AMD uses no power connectors, while Intel requires a single 8-pin connector and recommends a 250 W power supply. The Arc A380 is a dual-slot card measuring 222 mm in length, 114 mm in height, and 42 mm in width. AMD's dimensions are listed as portable device dependent, meaning it is not a standard add-in card. Display outputs also reflect this: AMD's outputs are portable device dependent, while Intel provides 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 2.0.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is significant. The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M uses the Navi 14 chip based on RDNA 1.0, a first-generation implementation of AMD's RDNA architecture. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Mobile) generation and supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. It has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores, meaning its feature set is limited to traditional rasterization and compute.

The Intel Arc A380 is built on the DG2-128 chip using the Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. This is a newer, more feature-rich design. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes hardware ray tracing, and it has 8 dedicated ray tracing cores. It also supports OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel card has no tensor cores listed, but the inclusion of RT cores sets it apart from the AMD card in terms of hardware capability.

The process nodes differ: AMD uses 7 nm, Intel uses 6 nm, both from TSMC. Intel's transistor density is higher, at 45.9M per mm² versus AMD's 40.5M per mm², despite the similar die sizes. The Intel card's predecessor is Xe Graphics and its successor is Battlemage, while the AMD card has no listed predecessor or successor. Both cards are end-of-life products, but the release dates are roughly two and a half years apart: AMD launched on November 12, 2019, and Intel on June 13, 2022.

The bus interface is the same for both: PCIe 4.0 x8. The Intel card has a launch MSRP of 149 USD. The AMD card has no launch MSRP listed. The Intel card also has a wider display output configuration, supporting multiple monitors via HDMI and DisplayPort, while the AMD card's outputs are dependent on the portable device it is integrated into.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload and platform. The Intel Arc A380 is the better choice for most modern graphics and compute scenarios. It wins eight of nine head-to-head benchmarks, including decisive victories in DirectX 12 (28.6% ahead), Vulkan (24% ahead), and OpenCL (23.5% ahead). Its higher clock speeds, greater FP32 throughput (4.198 TFLOPS versus 3.200 TFLOPS), and hardware ray tracing support make it the more capable card for contemporary games and GPU-accelerated applications. The 6 GB memory capacity also provides more headroom for modern textures and datasets. The Arc A380's launch MSRP of 149 USD makes it a specific, known quantity, though pricing is not a factor in the performance analysis.

The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M is the right pick for two specific scenarios. First, legacy DirectX 9 workloads: it wins that test by 9.6%, making it the better option for older games or software that rely on that API. Second, Apple ecosystem use: the Radeon Pro 5300M has a Geekbench Metal score of 33626, and no Metal score is recorded for the Intel card, indicating AMD's card is the compatible choice for Metal-based applications on macOS. The AMD card also has a higher global percentile (48 versus 44) and a higher average benchmark score (10013 versus 8558), driven by its Metal result.

For a general-purpose desktop GPU, the Intel Arc A380 is the stronger performer in almost every measurable way. The only scenario where the AMD card is clearly preferable is when DirectX 9 compatibility or Metal support is required. Users building a system around modern APIs, ray tracing, or compute workloads should favor the Intel card. Users locked into Apple's platform or running legacy DirectX 9 software should choose the AMD card. The benchmark data is unambiguous: Intel wins the modern workload battle, while AMD retains a narrow legacy and platform-specific advantage.