AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 vs Intel Arc Pro A60 Comparison

The Intel Arc Pro A60 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 land almost exactly on the same performance tier, with average benchmark scores of 60326 and 60140 respectively. That 0.3% gap in favor of the Intel card is statistically negligible, placing both in the 88th percentile of all GPUs. The data shows a near-total deadlock in aggregate compute, but the two cards achieve this parity through radically different designs and software paths. The Arc Pro A60 edges ahead in OpenCL by 18.1%, while the Radeon Pro Vega 48 counters with a 0.8% lead in Vulkan. The real differentiators are not raw average score but the specific workload, API, and platform context — the Vega 48 is an end-of-life integrated part for portable devices, whereas the Arc Pro A60 is an active, single-slot discrete card for PCIe 4.0 systems. The verdict from the data is straightforward: if you need a current, upgradeable workstation card with ray tracing and DisplayPort 2.0, the Intel part wins. If you are locked into a legacy Mac Pro chassis requiring an IGP with HBM2 memory, the AMD part is the only option that fits.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a split decision based on platform and feature requirements rather than raw performance. For any user assembling a new PCIe 4.0 workstation, the Intel Arc Pro A60 is the clear choice: it is production-active, has a 130 W TDP with a 300 W suggested PSU, and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. Its 18.1% OpenCL advantage over the Vega 48 (63485 vs 53757) makes it the stronger compute card for general-purpose workloads. Conversely, the Radeon Pro Vega 48 is the only viable pick for systems that require a portable-device-dependent IGP with no external power connectors — it is explicitly end-of-life, but its 8 GB HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus delivers 402.4 GB/s bandwidth, slightly exceeding the Arc’s 384.0 GB/s. The Vega 48 also holds a marginal Vulkan lead (57653 vs 57166), so users prioritizing Vulkan-based applications on a legacy Mac platform would see a 0.8% performance benefit. The data does not support a universal winner; it supports a platform-dependent verdict.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro A60 wins decisively in OpenCL compute, posting 63485 versus the Vega 48’s 53757 — an 18.1% margin that represents the single largest head-to-head delta. This advantage aligns with its higher FP32 throughput (8.397 TFLOPS vs 7.373 TFLOPS) and faster pixel rate (131.2 GPixel/s vs 76.80 GPixel/s). The Arc also wins on API modernity: it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Vega 48 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. For texture-heavy workloads, the Arc’s 262.4 GTexel/s texture rate exceeds the Vega’s 230.4 GTexel/s. The AMD card wins in memory bandwidth (402.4 GB/s vs 384.0 GB/s) due to its wider 2048-bit HBM2 bus, and it wins the Vulkan benchmark outright (57653 vs 57166). The Vega 48 also has more shading units (3072 vs 2048) and TMUs (192 vs 128), though these do not translate into an overall compute win. In the two benchmark tests, each card wins one — the Arc takes OpenCL, the Vega takes Vulkan.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from opposite ends of the design spectrum. The Intel Arc Pro A60 uses the DG2-256 chip built on TSMC’s 6 nm process, packing 11,500 million transistors into a 269 mm² die — a transistor density of 42.8M per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 uses the Vega 10 chip on GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm process, with 12,500 million transistors spread across a much larger 495 mm² die, yielding only 25.3M transistors per mm². The Intel architecture is Xe-HPG from the Alchemist generation, while the AMD architecture is GCN 5.0 from the Radeon Pro Mac Vega Series. Intel includes 16 dedicated ray tracing cores; AMD has none. The Arc supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the Vega 48 tops out at DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Memory configurations differ fundamentally: the Arc uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, while the Vega 48 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus. The Intel card is a discrete single-slot solution with a 130 W TDP, while the AMD card is an IGP with no power connectors, designed for portable devices.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 scores 60326, which is 0.3% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48’s 60140. Both sit in the 88th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: How large is the OpenCL performance gap?

A: The Arc Pro A60 scores 63485 in Geekbench OpenCL, beating the Vega 48’s 53757 by 18.1%. This is the largest delta in the head-to-head results.

Q: Does the AMD card win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the Radeon Pro Vega 48 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 57653, compared to the Arc’s 57166 — a 0.8% advantage.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The Intel card has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD card has 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 402.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: Only the Intel Arc Pro A60 has ray tracing hardware, featuring 16 ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 has no RT cores listed.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 is marked as Active, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 is End-of-life. The AMD card was released on 2019-03-18, and the Intel card on 2023-06-05.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test delivers the most significant performance separation. The Intel Arc Pro A60 scores 63485, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 scores 53757 — a difference of 9728 points, translating to an 18.1% lead for Intel. This is a substantial margin that indicates the Arc’s compute architecture is markedly more efficient in OpenCL workloads, likely due to its newer 6 nm process and higher FP32 throughput. The Vega 48’s higher shading unit count (3072 vs 2048) does not compensate for its older GCN 5.0 design in this test.

The Geekbench Vulkan test flips the result, though by a much narrower margin. The Vega 48 scores 57653, edging out the Arc’s 57166 by 487 points — a 0.8% difference. This near-tie suggests that Vulkan performance is essentially equivalent between the two, with the AMD card’s wider memory bus providing a slight advantage. In the aggregate, the Arc’s OpenCL win outweighs the Vega’s Vulkan win in terms of raw score differential, but the data records one win for each card. The average benchmark scores reflect this: Intel at 60326 and AMD at 60140, with a 0.3% delta.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge in nearly every major specification category. Process node: Intel uses 6 nm TSMC, AMD uses 14 nm GlobalFoundries. Die size: 269 mm² for Intel vs 495 mm² for AMD. Transistor count: 11,500 million for Intel vs 12,500 million for AMD. Transistor density: 42.8M per mm² vs 25.3M per mm². Clock speeds: Intel has a 900 MHz base and 2050 MHz boost; AMD lists no base or boost clocks but has a memory clock of 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective), while Intel’s memory clock is 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). Memory: 12 GB GDDR6 on 192-bit vs 8 GB HBM2 on 2048-bit; bandwidth is 384.0 GB/s vs 402.4 GB/s. Shading units: 2048 vs 3072. TMUs: 128 vs 192. ROPs: 64 for both. RT cores: 16 for Intel, none for AMD. Pixel rate: 131.2 GPixel/s vs 76.80 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 262.4 GTexel/s vs 230.4 GTexel/s. FP32: 8.397 TFLOPS vs 7.373 TFLOPS. FP16: 16.79 TFLOPS (2:1) vs 14.75 TFLOPS (2:1). TDP: 130 W for Intel, no TDP listed for AMD. Slot width: single-slot vs IGP. Power connectors: none listed for Intel, none for AMD. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 vs PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs: 4x DisplayPort 2.0 vs portable device dependent. API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 for Intel; DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3 for AMD. Production status: Active vs end-of-life. Release date: 2023-06-05 vs 2019-03-18.