AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 vs Intel Arc Pro A60 Comparison

The benchmark data positions the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 and Intel Arc Pro A60 as two very different solutions for professional workloads, separated by nearly six years of architectural evolution. The AMD card, built on the older GCN 5.0 architecture, retains a commanding lead in raw compute throughput, while the Intel card counters with modern features and a significantly higher boost clock. The head-to-head results are decisive, but the overall picture is nuanced by the distinct strengths each card brings to specific tasks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison between these two GPUs is a study in generational contrast. Across the two available benchmark tests, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 wins decisively, taking both victories. The most significant margin is in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the AMD card scores 74174 against the Intel Arc Pro A60's 57166. This represents a substantial 29.8% advantage for the Vega 64, indicating a considerable lead in this particular low-level graphics API workload. The gap is narrower in the Geekbench OpenCL test, but still clear: AMD scores 71094 to Intel's 63485, a 12% advantage. These results suggest that for pure compute throughput as measured by these benchmarks, the older AMD architecture remains highly competitive.

However, the data also reveals a crucial context for these wins. The Intel Arc Pro A60's average benchmark score of 60326 places it in the 88th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64's average of 72379 sits higher in the 91st percentile. Interestingly, the Intel card's nearest rival by average score is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090, with a deltaPct of 0. This is a surprising data point, suggesting the Arc Pro A60's average score is nearly identical to that flagship consumer card in this metric, though its individual test scores are far lower. Meanwhile, the AMD card's closest competitor is the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition, which is 1.4% ahead. This context shows that while AMD wins the head-to-head, the Intel card is not without its own strengths relative to other hardware.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 holds a clear lead, with an average benchmark score of 72379. This is significantly higher than the Intel Arc Pro A60's average of 60326.

Q: How much faster is the AMD card in the Vulkan benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 is 29.8% faster, scoring 74174 compared to the Intel Arc Pro A60's 57166 in the Geekbench Vulkan test.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro A60 offer any performance advantage in the head-to-head tests?

A: No. The data shows the AMD card winning both the OpenCL and Vulkan tests, with the Intel card failing to secure a win in either benchmark.

Q: What is the performance difference in the OpenCL test?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 scores 71094, which is 12% higher than the Intel Arc Pro A60's score of 63485 in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark.

Q: How does the Intel card's average score compare to a high-end NVIDIA GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60's average score of 60326 is effectively tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090, which has an average score of 60347, showing a deltaPct of 0.

Q: What is the overall win count in the head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 wins 2 benchmarks, while the Intel Arc Pro A60 wins 0.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures that reflect their respective design philosophies and release eras. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 is based on the Vega 10 chip using the GCN 5.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This older process node results in a large die size of 495 mm² and a transistor count of 12,500 million. In contrast, the Intel Arc Pro A60 uses the DG2-256 chip based on the Xe-HPG architecture, built on a much more modern 6 nm process at TSMC. This allows Intel to pack 11,500 million transistors into a significantly smaller 269 mm² die. The difference in process technology is stark, with Intel achieving a transistor density of 42.8M per mm² compared to AMD's 25.3M per mm².

The core configurations also differ dramatically. The AMD card is equipped with 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 render output units (ROPs). It does not have any dedicated ray tracing cores. The Intel card, while having fewer traditional units at 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, introduces 16 dedicated ray tracing cores. This is a key feature absent from the older AMD card. The AMD card also features a much larger memory subsystem with 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 402.4 GB/s. The Intel card uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, providing a slightly lower bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s.

Clock speeds tell a story of their own. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 has a base clock of 1250 MHz and a boost clock of 1350 MHz. The Intel Arc Pro A60, despite a lower base clock of 900 MHz, has a significantly higher boost clock of 2050 MHz. This high boost clock allows the Intel card to achieve a higher pixel rate of 131.2 GPixel/s compared to AMD's 86.40 GPixel/s, despite having the same number of ROPs. However, the AMD card's larger number of TMUs gives it a higher texture rate of 345.6 GTexel/s versus Intel's 262.4 GTexel/s. In raw FP32 compute, the AMD card leads with 11.06 TFLOPS compared to Intel's 8.397 TFLOPS. The FP16 performance follows a similar pattern, with AMD at 22.12 TFLOPS and Intel at 16.79 TFLOPS, both operating at a 2:1 ratio.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear, but not complete, picture. For users whose primary concern is raw compute performance in OpenCL and Vulkan workloads, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 is the definitive choice. It is 12% faster in OpenCL and a substantial 29.8% faster in Vulkan. Its higher average benchmark score of 72379, placing it in the 91st percentile, reinforces its strength in these areas. The data suggests that for general compute tasks that rely heavily on FP32 throughput and memory bandwidth, the older AMD architecture still holds a significant edge over the newer Intel design.

However, the verdict for the Intel Arc Pro A60 is not one of outright failure. Its architecture is fundamentally newer, built on a more advanced 6 nm process with a much smaller die and higher clock speeds. The inclusion of 16 ray tracing cores is a feature the AMD card simply does not have. Its high boost clock of 2050 MHz and resulting higher pixel rate indicate a design optimized for different types of workloads. The fact that its average score is tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090, while an anomaly, suggests that the card's overall performance profile is competitive in ways not captured by the head-to-head tests. The choice depends on the workload: pure compute favors AMD, but a user valuing modern API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate) and ray tracing capabilities would find the Intel card to be the more future-proof option.

Specification Differences

• Architecture: AMD uses GCN 5.0, while Intel uses Xe-HPG.
• Process Node: The AMD card is built on a 14 nm process, compared to Intel's 6 nm process.
• Foundry: The AMD chip is manufactured by GlobalFoundries, while Intel uses TSMC.
• Transistor Count: AMD's chip has 12,500 million transistors, slightly more than Intel's 11,500 million.
• Die Size: The AMD die is 495 mm², which is significantly larger than Intel's 269 mm² die.
• Base Clock: AMD's base clock is 1250 MHz, which is higher than Intel's 900 MHz.
• Boost Clock: Intel's boost clock is 2050 MHz, notably higher than AMD's 1350 MHz.
• Memory Size: The AMD card has 16 GB of memory, compared to Intel's 12 GB.
• Memory Type: AMD uses HBM2, while Intel uses GDDR6.
• Memory Bus Width: The AMD card has a 2048-bit bus, which is wider than Intel's 192-bit bus.
• Memory Bandwidth: AMD's bandwidth is 402.4 GB/s, slightly higher than Intel's 384.0 GB/s.
• Shading Units: AMD has 4096 shading units, double the 2048 found in the Intel card.
• TMUs: AMD has 256 texture mapping units, while Intel has 128.
• Ray Tracing Cores: Intel has 16 dedicated ray tracing cores; AMD has none.
• Pixel Rate: Intel achieves a higher pixel rate of 131.2 GPixel/s, compared to AMD's 86.40 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: AMD has a higher texture rate of 345.6 GTexel/s, versus Intel's 262.4 GTexel/s.
• FP32 Performance: AMD leads with 11.06 TFLOPS, ahead of Intel's 8.397 TFLOPS.
• TDP: The AMD card has a TDP of 250 W, while the Intel card is more efficient at 130 W.
• Suggested PSU: Intel recommends a 300 W power supply, while AMD does not list one.
• Slot Width: The AMD card is an IGP, while the Intel card is a single-slot design.
• Bus Interface: AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while Intel uses the newer PCIe 4.0 x16.
• Display Outputs: Intel has 4x DisplayPort 2.0, while AMD's outputs are portable device dependent.
• DirectX Support: Intel supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_1).
• Vulkan Support: Intel supports Vulkan 1.4, while AMD supports Vulkan 1.3.
• Production Status: The AMD card is end-of-life, while the Intel card is active.