AMD Radeon Pro 570X vs Intel Arc Pro A30M Comparison

Intel Arc Pro A30M and AMD Radeon Pro 570X are both end-of-life mobile workstation GPUs that land in the same performance percentile, yet they represent radically different design philosophies. The Intel part is a modern, power-efficient Alchemist-generation chip built on TSMC's 6 nm process, while the AMD part is a legacy GCN 4.0 part on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm node. Benchmark data places them within 0.7% of each other in average score, but the underlying architecture and feature sets diverge sharply.

FAQ

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare between the Intel Arc Pro A30M and AMD Radeon Pro 570X?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A30M has an average benchmark score of 31894, while the AMD Radeon Pro 570X scores 31682. This puts the Intel part 0.7% ahead of the AMD part in average score.

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL performance, and by how much?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A30M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 31894 versus 27604 for the AMD Radeon Pro 570X, a decisive 15.5% margin.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A30M packs 45.9 million transistors per mm², which is nearly double the 24.6M / mm² density of the AMD Radeon Pro 570X, reflecting the Intel part's smaller 6 nm process node.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro 570X support ray tracing hardware?

A: No, the AMD Radeon Pro 570X has no ray tracing cores listed in its specifications. In contrast, the Intel Arc Pro A30M includes 8 ray tracing cores.

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A30M delivers 4.096 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, slightly ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 570X's 3.960 TFLOPS, a difference of roughly 3.4%.

Q: How do the memory subsystems differ in bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 570X provides 217.0 GB/s of bandwidth over a 256-bit bus, whereas the Intel Arc Pro A30M offers 128.0 GB/s over a 64-bit bus. AMD has a 69.5% bandwidth advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are separated by more than a process generation. Intel's DG2-128 chip uses the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the Alchemist generation for Pro-Series Mobile, built on a 6 nm TSMC process. The AMD Ellesmere chip uses the older GCN 4.0 architecture from the Radeon Pro Mac 500X series, fabricated on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process. This process gap is stark: Intel packs 7,200 million transistors into a 157 mm² die, while AMD fits 5,700 million transistors into a much larger 232 mm² die. The resulting transistor density of 45.9M / mm² for Intel versus 24.6M / mm² for AMD shows a near-doubling of integration efficiency.

Clock speeds also reflect the architectural divide. Intel runs at a 1500 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost, while AMD operates at a 1000 MHz base and 1105 MHz boost. Intel's higher clocks are enabled by the smaller process node and lower power envelope. The shading unit counts tell a different story: AMD has 1792 shading units and 112 TMUs, while Intel has 1024 shading units and 64 TMUs. Both have 32 ROPs. Despite having fewer shaders, Intel achieves higher texture rate at 128.0 GTexel/s versus 123.8 GTexel/s, and a much higher pixel rate at 64.00 GPixel/s versus 35.36 GPixel/s.

Feature support is a major differentiator. Intel supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) with 8 ray tracing cores, while AMD is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) with no ray tracing hardware. Vulkan support also differs: Intel lists 1.4, AMD lists 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Intel's FP16 performance is double its FP32 at 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), whereas AMD's FP16 matches its FP32 at 3.960 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). The memory technologies are equally divergent: Intel uses 4 GB of GDDR6 at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), while AMD uses 4 GB of GDDR5 at 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective). Intel's memory clock is higher, but AMD's 256-bit bus versus Intel's 64-bit bus gives AMD the bandwidth crown.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and it shows a clear victory for Intel. The Intel Arc Pro A30M scores 31894, beating the AMD Radeon Pro 570X's 27604 by 15.5%. This is a substantial margin for two GPUs that otherwise sit within 0.7% of each other in average score. The OpenCL result likely reflects Intel's architecture advantages: higher boost clock (2000 MHz vs 1105 MHz), superior pixel rate (64.00 GPixel/s vs 35.36 GPixel/s), and greater FP32 throughput (4.096 TFLOPS vs 3.960 TFLOPS).

The AMD part does have wins in other benchmark APIs, though these are not head-to-head comparisons. In Geekbench Metal, AMD scores 40066, and in Geekbench Vulkan it scores 27376. Intel does not have corresponding Metal or Vulkan benchmark scores in the data, so direct comparison is impossible. However, the AMD part's Vulkan score of 27376 is lower than Intel's OpenCL score of 31894, suggesting Intel may hold an advantage in compute-heavy workloads regardless of API.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each GPU provides additional context. The Intel Arc Pro A30M's rivals include the NVIDIA TITAN RTX (31676, 0.7% slower) and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 (31401, 1.6% slower), while the AMD Radeon Pro 570X has the same NVIDIA TITAN RTX at 31676 (0% delta) and the Quadro RTX 8000 at 31401 (0.9% faster). The AMD FirePro S10000 scores 32388, which is 1.5% ahead of the Intel part. These rival scores confirm that both GPUs sit in a tightly clustered performance band around 31-32k in average score, with no clear winner among this peer group.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal fundamental differences in almost every category. The manufacturing process is the most obvious: Intel uses 6 nm TSMC, AMD uses 14 nm GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts are 7,200 million for Intel versus 5,700 million for AMD, and die sizes are 157 mm² versus 232 mm² respectively. Clock speeds differ substantially: Intel's base clock is 1500 MHz with a 2000 MHz boost, while AMD's is 1000 MHz base and 1105 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: Intel runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), AMD at 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective).

Memory bus width is a major divergence: Intel uses a 64-bit bus, AMD uses a 256-bit bus, resulting in bandwidth of 128.0 GB/s versus 217.0 GB/s. Both have 4 GB of memory, but Intel uses GDDR6 while AMD uses GDDR5. The compute units differ: Intel has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs; AMD has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Intel adds 8 ray tracing cores, which AMD lacks entirely. Pixel rate is 64.00 GPixel/s for Intel versus 35.36 GPixel/s for AMD. Texture rates are close: 128.0 GTexel/s versus 123.8 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 4.096 TFLOPS versus 3.960 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 8.192 TFLOPS versus 3.960 TFLOPS.

Power consumption is dramatically different: Intel has a 50 W TDP, while AMD draws 150 W. Both use no power connectors and are listed as "Portable Device Dependent" for display outputs. The bus interface differs: Intel uses PCIe 4.0 x8, AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x16. API support shows Intel ahead on DirectX (12 Ultimate vs 12) and Vulkan (1.4 vs 1.3), while both support OpenGL 4.6. Release dates are also years apart: Intel launched on 2022-08-07, AMD on 2019-03-17.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro A30M wins in compute-heavy and modern-API workloads. Its OpenCL score of 31894 is 15.5% higher than AMD's 27604, making it the clear choice for OpenCL-based applications. Intel's 8 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support position it for ray-traced workloads and the latest graphics features, which AMD cannot handle at all. The 2:1 FP16 ratio (8.192 TFLOPS) gives Intel an edge in workloads that can utilize half-precision arithmetic, potentially doubling throughput in AI inference or certain scientific computations. The lower 50 W TDP also makes Intel more suitable for thermally constrained mobile workstations, where power efficiency is paramount. Higher boost clock (2000 MHz vs 1105 MHz) and pixel rate (64.00 GPixel/s vs 35.36 GPixel/s) suggest better fill-rate-bound performance.

The AMD Radeon Pro 570X retains advantages in specific areas. Its 256-bit memory bus and 217.0 GB/s bandwidth are 69.5% higher than Intel's, which benefits workloads that are highly memory-bandwidth-sensitive, such as large data sets or certain compute kernels. The higher shading unit count (1792 vs 1024) and TMU count (112 vs 64) may help in shader-heavy scenarios where raw parallel ALU throughput matters more than clock speed. AMD's Geekbench Metal score of 40066 indicates strong performance in Apple's Metal API, which is relevant for macOS-based workflows. The older GCN architecture also has a long track record of driver maturity in professional applications. However, these advantages are not reflected in the head-to-head OpenCL result, where Intel wins decisively. For users prioritizing raw compute in OpenCL or wanting ray tracing support, Intel is superior; for those needing maximum memory bandwidth or Metal performance, AMD retains a niche.