AMD Radeon Pro Duo vs Intel Arc A730M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison between the Intel Arc A730M and the AMD Radeon Pro Duo is limited to a single recorded test in the database: Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the Intel Arc A730M delivers a score of 70,352, while the AMD Radeon Pro Duo scores 35,860. This represents a 96.2% advantage for the Intel part, making the outcome decisive. The Intel Arc A730M wins the only head-to-head benchmark available, with a final win count of 1 versus 0 for the AMD Radeon Pro Duo.

Looking at the broader average benchmark scores, the Intel Arc A730M sits at 45,592, placing it in the 84th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT at 45,384 (0.5% higher), the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation at 45,972 (0.8% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile at 45,152 (1% higher), and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 at 46,043 (1% lower). The Intel part is essentially in a tight cluster with these cards, within about a percentage point of each.

The AMD Radeon Pro Duo, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 35,860, placing it in the 80th percentile. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 at 35,520 (1% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile at 35,435 (1.2% higher), the NVIDIA T1000 at 36,289 (1.2% lower), and the AMD Radeon RX 5300M at 36,529 (1.8% lower). The Radeon Pro Duo sits in a similar tight cluster but at a substantially lower performance tier.

The gap between the two cards is large. The Intel Arc A730M's average score of 45,592 is about 27% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro Duo's 35,860. In the single direct test, the difference is even more pronounced. The OpenCL result shows the Intel part at nearly double the score of the AMD part. This is not a marginal difference; it is a clear generational and architectural leap.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear conclusion: the Intel Arc A730M is the stronger performer in every recorded benchmark. It wins the only head-to-head test with a 96.2% margin, and its average score across all benchmarks is significantly higher than the AMD Radeon Pro Duo's. The Intel part also holds a higher percentile ranking, 84th versus 80th, indicating better overall standing among all GPUs in the database.

For users selecting between these two, the Intel Arc A730M is the choice when raw compute performance is the priority. The OpenCL result alone is enough to justify this, but the average score reinforces it. The AMD Radeon Pro Duo, while still a capable card in the 80th percentile, is simply outclassed in the recorded data. There is no benchmark where the AMD part wins, and no metric in the database suggests it can match the Intel part's output. The verdict from the measurements is unambiguous: the Intel Arc A730M is the superior GPU.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different design eras and philosophies. The Intel Arc A730M is built on the DG2-512 chip, using the Xe-HPG architecture, and belongs to the Alchemist generation (Arc 7 Mobile). It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 53.4 million per square millimeter.

The AMD Radeon Pro Duo uses the Capsaicin chip, based on the GCN 3.0 architecture, and is part of the Radeon Pro GCN generation. It is fabricated on a much older 28 nm process, also at TSMC, with 8,900 million transistors on a larger 596 mm² die. The transistor density is just 14.9 million per square millimeter. This difference in process technology explains a great deal of the performance gap.

Memory configurations differ substantially. The Intel Arc A730M has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Radeon Pro Duo has only 4 GB of HBM memory, but on a massive 4096-bit bus, achieving 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD card has higher raw bandwidth, but the Intel card has three times the capacity.

Compute resources also diverge. The Intel Arc A730M has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, along with 24 dedicated ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon Pro Duo has more shading units at 4,096, more TMUs at 256, but fewer ROPs at 64, and no ray tracing cores at all. The Intel card also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the AMD card is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0). Vulkan support differs too, with the Intel card at 1.4 versus the AMD card at 1.2.170.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 performance?

A: The Intel Arc A730M delivers 12.60 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the AMD Radeon Pro Duo delivers 8.192 TFLOPS. The Intel card is about 54% higher in this metric.

Q: How does memory capacity compare between the two?

A: The Intel Arc A730M has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the AMD Radeon Pro Duo has 4 GB of HBM memory. The Intel card offers three times the capacity.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro Duo support ray tracing?

A: No. The AMD Radeon Pro Duo has no ray tracing cores listed in the database. The Intel Arc A730M includes 24 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The Intel Arc A730M has a TDP of 80 W, while the AMD Radeon Pro Duo has a TDP of 350 W. The AMD card also requires three 8-pin power connectors and a 750 W suggested power supply.

Q: Which card has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Duo has a higher memory bandwidth at 512.0 GB/s, compared to the Intel Arc A730M's 336.0 GB/s. However, the Intel card has more memory capacity.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each card?

A: The Intel Arc A730M has an average benchmark score of 45,592, placing it in the 84th percentile. The AMD Radeon Pro Duo has an average score of 35,860, placing it in the 80th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A730M wins in every performance category recorded in the database. It leads in the OpenCL benchmark by 96.2%, and its average score is roughly 27% higher. It also wins on FP32 compute, pixel rate, texture rate, and memory capacity. The Intel card has 196.8 GPixel/s pixel rate versus 64.00 GPixel/s for the AMD card, and 393.6 GTexel/s texture rate versus 256.0 GTexel/s. The Intel card also supports newer APIs, including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4.

The AMD Radeon Pro Duo does have some advantages in specific areas. It has a wider memory bus at 4096-bit versus 192-bit, and higher memory bandwidth at 512.0 GB/s versus 336.0 GB/s. It also has more shading units, 4,096 versus 3,072, and more TMUs, 256 versus 192. However, these raw resource advantages do not translate into benchmark wins. The AMD card also has a larger die at 596 mm² versus 406 mm², but with far fewer transistors. In terms of use cases, the AMD card could be favored in scenarios where memory bandwidth is the bottleneck, but the recorded data shows no such scenario where it wins.

For most workloads, the Intel Arc A730M is the clear choice. Its higher FP32 and FP16 performance, plus ray tracing support, make it more versatile for modern applications. The AMD Radeon Pro Duo is an older design with no ray tracing and lower compute throughput. The data does not support any use case where the AMD card outperforms the Intel card in a benchmark.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the Intel Arc A730M and the AMD Radeon Pro Duo:

• Architecture: Intel Xe-HPG versus AMD GCN 3.0
• Generation: Alchemist (Arc 7 Mobile) versus Radeon Pro GCN
• Process Node: 6 nm versus 28 nm
• Transistors: 21,700 million versus 8,900 million
• Die Size: 406 mm² versus 596 mm²
• Transistor Density: 53.4M / mm² versus 14.9M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1100 MHz versus not specified
• Boost Clock: 2050 MHz versus not specified
• Memory Clock: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective)
• Memory Size: 12 GB versus 4 GB
• Memory Type: GDDR6 versus HBM
• Memory Bus Width: 192 bit versus 4096 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 336.0 GB/s versus 512.0 GB/s
• Shading Units: 3072 versus 4096
• TMUs: 192 versus 256
• ROPs: 96 versus 64
• Ray Tracing Cores: 24 versus none
• Pixel Rate: 196.8 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 393.6 GTexel/s versus 256.0 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: 12.60 TFLOPS versus 8.192 TFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: 25.19 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 8.192 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 80 W versus 350 W
• Slot Width: IGP versus Dual-slot
• Power Connectors: not specified versus 3x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: not specified versus 750 W
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent versus 1x HDMI 1.4a, 3x DisplayPort 1.2
• DirectX Support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_0)
• Vulkan Support: 1.4 versus 1.2.170
• Dimensions: not specified versus 277 mm (10.9 inches) length, 111 mm (4.4 inches) height
• Release Date: not specified versus April 25, 2016
• Average Benchmark Score: 45,592 versus 35,860
• Percentile vs All GPUs: 84 versus 80