AMD Radeon Pro W5500X vs Intel Arc A370M Comparison

Intel Arc A370M and AMD Radeon Pro W5500X are both end-of-life mobile and workstation graphics solutions, respectively, but they approach performance from different design philosophies. The data shows the Arc A370M achieves an average benchmark score of 29175, placing it in the 74th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon Pro W5500X scores 27973, sitting in the 73rd percentile. This places the Intel part slightly ahead overall, but the comparison is nuanced by the fact that each card was tested under different API conditions, with the Arc card submitting scores for OpenCL and Vulkan, and the AMD card submitting a single Metal score.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison is not a direct apples-to-apples contest, as the two cards were benchmarked using different APIs. The Intel Arc A370M posts a Geekbench OpenCL score of 29676 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 28673. The AMD Radeon Pro W5500X, on the other hand, delivers a Geekbench Metal score of 27973. When looking at the raw average scores, the Arc A370M leads by approximately 4.3% over the Radeon Pro W5500X (29175 vs 27973). This is a modest margin, but it is importantly the Intel card achieves this lead despite having a significantly lower power envelope.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card provides additional context. The Arc A370M’s average score of 29175 is effectively tied with the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, which scores 29197, a delta of -0.1%, and the AMD FirePro W8000, which scores 29211, also a delta of -0.1%. It is 0.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 470 (28996) and 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (28874). This suggests the Arc A370M is positioned in a competitive mid-range tier, trading blows with older flagship and upper-midrange parts.

For the Radeon Pro W5500X, its 27973 average score is a 0.2% deficit against the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (28020) and a 0.5% deficit against the AMD FirePro S7150 (28117). It is 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7800M (27883) and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (27839). The proximity of these scores indicates that the W5500X sits in a similar performance band, but the Intel card’s higher percentile ranking and raw average score suggest it has a slight edge in compute-heavy workloads that leverage OpenCL or Vulkan.

The data implies that in synthetic compute benchmarks, the Intel Arc A370M is the stronger performer, but the margin is thin. The difference between the two cards’ average scores is just 1202 points, which is less than the variance seen between some of their closest rivals. This suggests that real-world application performance could easily tip the balance depending on API optimization and driver maturity.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is substantial, reflecting their different target markets and release timelines. The Intel Arc A370M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, and is part of the Alchemist generation for Arc 3 Mobile. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, containing 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9 million per mm². In contrast, the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X uses the RDNA 1.0 architecture with the Navi 14 chip, part of the Radeon Pro Mac generation. It is built on a larger 7 nm process at TSMC, with 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, resulting in a lower transistor density of 40.5 million per mm².

The Intel chip’s newer 6 nm node allows for a higher transistor count in nearly the same die area, which is reflected in its feature set. The Arc A370M includes 8 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Radeon Pro W5500X, which has no RT cores listed. This gives the Intel part a hardware advantage in ray-traced workloads, assuming software support. The Arc A370M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Radeon Pro W5500X is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Memory configurations also diverge sharply. The Intel card comes with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD card doubles the capacity to 8 GB of GDDR6, doubles the bus width to 128-bit, and consequently doubles the bandwidth to 224.0 GB/s. This is a critical difference for large datasets or high-resolution textures. The clock speeds show the Intel chip running higher, with a base of 1550 MHz and a boost of 2050 MHz, compared to the AMD’s 1187 MHz base and 1757 MHz boost, but the AMD card compensates with more shading units (1536 vs 1024) and texture mapping units (96 vs 64). Both have 32 ROPs.

The power and form factor differences are stark. The Arc A370M is rated at 35 W TDP and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a slot width of IGP, meaning it is designed for mobile integration. The Radeon Pro W5500X is a 125 W part with a Dual-slot form factor, requiring a 300 W suggested power supply. This makes the Intel part dramatically more power-efficient on paper, delivering 4.198 TFLOPS of FP32 performance at 35 W, while the AMD card delivers 5.398 TFLOPS at 125 W. The AMD card does have a higher peak throughput, but the Intel card achieves 119.9 GFLOPS per watt, compared to the AMD’s 43.2 GFLOPS per watt.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark and specification data, the Intel Arc A370M is the more compelling choice for compute performance per watt and for features like ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate support. Its average benchmark score of 29175 is higher than the Radeon Pro W5500X’s 27973, and it achieves this with a 35 W TDP versus 125 W, a massive efficiency advantage. The Intel card also supports the latest DirectX feature set and includes hardware ray tracing cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely.

However, the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X is not without merit. It offers 8 GB of VRAM versus 4 GB, and its 224.0 GB/s bandwidth is double that of the Intel part. Its FP32 throughput of 5.398 TFLOPS is also higher than the Intel’s 4.198 TFLOPS. This suggests that in scenarios where memory capacity and raw shading power are paramount—such as large scene rendering without ray tracing—the AMD card could outperform the Intel part, despite its lower benchmark score. The AMD card also has a higher texture rate of 168.7 GTexel/s versus 131.2 GTexel/s, indicating better performance in texture-heavy workloads.

The data suggests that the Intel card is the better all-rounder for modern gaming and compute features, while the AMD card is a specialized workstation part for Mac environments, given its Apple MPX bus interface and 2x HDMI 2.0b outputs. The Intel card’s display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning it is tied to a specific laptop’s display configuration. For a user prioritizing power efficiency, modern API support, and ray tracing, the Intel Arc A370M is the clear winner. For a user needing double the VRAM and higher raw texture throughput in a desktop workstation, the Radeon Pro W5500X holds its own.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A370M has a higher average benchmark score of 29175, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X’s 27973.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X support ray tracing?

A: No, the Radeon Pro W5500X has no ray tracing cores listed in its specifications. The Intel Arc A370M, in contrast, includes 8 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5500X offers 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is exactly double the 112.0 GB/s provided by the Intel Arc A370M.

Q: Which card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Only the Intel Arc A370M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The AMD Radeon Pro W5500X is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The Intel Arc A370M has a 35 W TDP and is an IGP, while the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X has a 125 W TDP, is a Dual-slot card, and requires a 300 W suggested power supply.

Q: What is the transistor density of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc A370M has a transistor density of 45.9 million per mm², while the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X has a lower density of 40.5 million per mm².

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A370M wins in scenarios that favor its architectural modernity and efficiency. Its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and hardware ray tracing cores makes it the better choice for games and applications that leverage these features. The data shows it is 4.3% ahead in average benchmark score, and its 74th percentile ranking versus the AMD’s 73rd percentile reinforces this. The Intel card’s higher boost clock of 2050 MHz and higher pixel rate of 65.60 GPixel/s (versus 56.22 GPixel/s) also indicate an edge in fill-rate-bound scenarios. Its 35 W TDP makes it suitable for thin-and-light mobile devices where power draw is a constraint, and its 6 nm process node indicates a more advanced manufacturing technology.

The AMD Radeon Pro W5500X wins in memory-capacity-sensitive and raw-throughput-focused workloads. Its 8 GB of VRAM is double the Intel’s 4 GB, making it superior for large datasets, high-resolution textures, or multi-application workflows that exceed 4 GB. Its 224.0 GB/s bandwidth is a decisive advantage in bandwidth-bound tasks. The AMD card also has a higher FP32 compute rate of 5.398 TFLOPS and a higher texture rate of 168.7 GTexel/s, suggesting it can process more shading and texturing work per cycle. Its 1536 shading units and 96 TMUs are 50% and 50% higher than the Intel’s 1024 and 64, respectively, which could translate to better performance in traditional rasterization without ray tracing. Its Apple MPX bus interface and 2x HDMI 2.0b outputs also make it the only choice for specific Mac Pro configurations.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the Intel Arc A370M and the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X, based on the data provided:

• Chip: Intel uses DG2-128; AMD uses Navi 14.
• Architecture: Intel uses Xe-HPG; AMD uses RDNA 1.0.
• Generation: Intel is Alchemist (Arc 3 Mobile); AMD is Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Series).
• Process Node: Intel is 6 nm; AMD is 7 nm.
• Transistors: Intel has 7,200 million; AMD has 6,400 million.
• Die Size: Intel is 157 mm²; AMD is 158 mm².
• Transistor Density: Intel is 45.9M / mm²; AMD is 40.5M / mm².
• Base Clock: Intel is 1550 MHz; AMD is 1187 MHz.
• Boost Clock: Intel is 2050 MHz; AMD is 1757 MHz.
• Memory Size: Intel is 4 GB; AMD is 8 GB.
• Memory Bus Width: Intel is 64 bit; AMD is 128 bit.
• Memory Bandwidth: Intel is 112.0 GB/s; AMD is 224.0 GB/s.
• Shading Units: Intel has 1024; AMD has 1536.
• TMUs: Intel has 64; AMD has 96.
• RT Cores: Intel has 8; AMD has 0 (not listed).
• Pixel Rate: Intel is 65.60 GPixel/s; AMD is 56.22 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: Intel is 131.2 GTexel/s; AMD is 168.7 GTexel/s.
• FP32 Performance: Intel is 4.198 TFLOPS; AMD is 5.398 TFLOPS.
• FP16 Performance: Intel is 8.397 TFLOPS (2:1); AMD is 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1).
• TDP: Intel is 35 W; AMD is 125 W.
• Slot Width: Intel is IGP; AMD is Dual-slot.
• Suggested PSU: Intel has none listed; AMD is 300 W.
• Bus Interface: Intel is PCIe 4.0 x8; AMD is Apple MPX.
• Display Outputs: Intel is Portable Device Dependent; AMD is 2x HDMI 2.0b.
• DirectX Support: Intel is 12 Ultimate (12_2); AMD is 12 (12_1).
• Release Date: Intel is 2022-03-29; AMD is 2019-12-10.
• Launch MSRP: Intel has none listed; AMD is 599 USD.
• Benchmark Scores: Intel has Geekbench OpenCL 29676 and Vulkan 28673; AMD has Geekbench Metal 27973.
• Average Benchmark Score: Intel is 29175; AMD is 27973.
• Percentile vs All GPUs: Intel is 74; AMD is 73.