AMD Radeon PRO W7500 vs Intel Arc A380E x2 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison situation. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 has a full set of benchmark results across nine different tests, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 has no benchmark entries in the database. This absence of direct head-to-head measurements means the analysis must rely on the AMD card's absolute scores and its position relative to other GPUs in the database, rather than a direct comparison between the two cards.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 delivers its strongest showing in the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 68,634, which is notably higher than its Geekbench OpenCL result of 58,213. This gap of more than 10,000 points suggests the RDNA 3.0 architecture responds particularly well to Vulkan workloads, a pattern consistent with modern graphics APIs that expose lower-level hardware control.

In the Passmark suite, the W7500 shows a distinctive profile. The DirectX 9 score of 200 stands as the highest among the DirectX tests, with DirectX 11 reaching 125, DirectX 10 at 65, and DirectX 12 at 46. This descending pattern across newer API versions is curious. The data indicates the card's raw compute capabilities are better captured by older, less complex rendering paths, or perhaps the drivers optimize differently for each API generation.

The Passmark G3D score of 13,368 and GPU Compute score of 5,910 provide additional context. The compute score represents roughly 44% of the G3D score, which indicates a substantial portion of the card's graphics performance translates to general-purpose compute workloads. The G2D score of 1,174 reflects 2D desktop and windowing performance, a separate metric from the 3D and compute tests.

The W7500's average benchmark score across all tests is 16,415, placing it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals in the database are clustered remarkably close. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell matches at 16,408 with a 0% delta, the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT scores 16,361 with a 0.3% delta, the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M scores 16,351 with a 0.4% delta, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 scores 16,504 with a -0.5% delta. This tight grouping within 0.9% total spread means the W7500 effectively sits in a performance tier with several very different GPUs from multiple generations and market segments.

For the Intel Arc A380E x2, the database records zero benchmarks, zero wins, and no nearest rivals. The absence of measured data prevents any quantitative comparison. The A380E x2 has an average benchmark score of 0 in the database, which does not reflect its theoretical capabilities but rather the lack of recorded measurements. Any analysis of the Intel card must therefore focus on its architectural specifications and how those specifications relate to the AMD card's measured results, without claiming specific performance deltas.

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The W7500's average benchmark score of 16,415 places it within 0.9% of four other GPUs. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell is essentially tied at 16,408 with a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT trails by 0.3% at 16,361, the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M trails by 0.4% at 16,351, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 leads by 0.5% at 16,504.

Q: What is the Intel Arc A380E x2's benchmark standing?

A: The database contains no benchmark entries for the Intel Arc A380E x2. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, its wins count is 0, and it has no nearest rivals listed. The card sits at the 50th percentile of all GPUs, but this percentile is based on its specification profile rather than measured performance data.

Q: Which API shows the largest performance gap for the AMD card?

A: The Geekbench Vulkan score of 68,634 exceeds the Geekbench OpenCL score of 58,213 by 10,421 points, roughly 17.9% higher. Within the Passmark DirectX tests, the spread is wider: DirectX 9 at 200 is 4.3 times the DirectX 12 score of 46.

Q: What does the Passmark DirectX score pattern indicate?

A: The scores decline from 200 in DirectX 9 to 125 in DirectX 11, 65 in DirectX 10, and 46 in DirectX 12. This pattern suggests the card's measured performance under older DirectX versions is significantly higher, potentially reflecting driver maturity or workload characteristics of each API version.

Q: How does the AMD card's compute performance relate to its graphics performance?

A: The Passmark GPU Compute score of 5,910 is approximately 44.2% of the Passmark G3D score of 13,368. This ratio indicates that compute workloads achieve less than half the throughput of graphics workloads in the Passmark test suite.

Q: What is the production status difference between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 has an Active production status, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 is marked End-of-life. The Intel card's successor is listed as Battlemage, and its predecessor is Xe Graphics. The AMD card's predecessor is Radeon Pro Vega.

Architecture Differences

The two cards use fundamentally different GPU architectures. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 uses the Navi 33 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the DG2-128 chip built on Xe-HPG architecture from the Alchemist generation, specifically Arc 3 tier.

Both cards are manufactured by TSMC on a 6 nm process node, but the transistor counts differ substantially. The AMD chip contains 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2 million per mm². The Intel chip contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, resulting in a density of 45.9 million per mm². The AMD die is larger and packs significantly more transistors, which correlates with its higher compute resources.

The execution resource counts show a clear hierarchy. The AMD card has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 raster operation units, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Intel card has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. In every category, the AMD card has more resources, with the ray tracing core difference being the most pronounced at 3.5 times more.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The Intel card operates at a fixed 2000 MHz for both base and boost clocks. The AMD card has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 1700 MHz. Despite lower clock speeds, the AMD card's larger resource count produces substantially higher theoretical throughput. The FP32 compute of 12.19 TFLOPS for AMD is three times the Intel card's 4.096 TFLOPS. The FP16 figures follow the same ratio: 24.37 TFLOPS for AMD versus 8.192 TFLOPS for Intel, both using 2:1 ratio implementations.

Memory configurations also differ. The AMD card uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel card uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock for AMD is 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective, while Intel runs at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective. The AMD card has 2 GB more capacity and 70 GB/s more bandwidth.

Pixel and texture rates follow the resource counts. The AMD card achieves 108.8 GPixel/s and 190.4 GTexel/s, while the Intel card achieves 64.00 GPixel/s and 128.0 GTexel/s. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Verdict

The data shows two cards at opposite ends of their lifecycles. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 is Active in production, launched on 2023-08-02, and carries a launch MSRP of 429 USD. The Intel Arc A380E x2 is End-of-life, launched on 2024-03-31, with no launch MSRP recorded.

For measured performance, only the AMD card has data. Its average benchmark score of 16,415 places it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs. The Intel card sits at the 50th percentile but with no recorded benchmarks. Any choice between these two cards based on benchmark data must favor the AMD card solely because it has verifiable performance numbers. The Intel card's absence from the database means its actual performance relative to the W7500 cannot be confirmed from recorded measurements.

The AMD card also offers a 33% larger memory capacity with 8 GB versus 6 GB, higher bandwidth at 256.0 GB/s versus 186.0 GB/s, three times the FP32 throughput, and more than triple the ray tracing cores. It achieves these specifications with a lower TDP of 70 W compared to 130 W for the Intel card. The AMD card draws power entirely through the PCIe slot with no power connectors, while the Intel card requires a 6-pin connector. The suggested PSU for AMD is 250 W versus 300 W for Intel.

The Intel card has advantages in clock speed, running at 2000 MHz fixed versus AMD's 1700 MHz boost. It also offers more display outputs: 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 versus 4x DisplayPort 2.1. The Intel card is longer at 265 mm versus 216 mm, taller at 127 mm versus 115 mm, with identical 20 mm width. Both use PCIe 4.0 x8 interfaces.

The production status is decisive from a longevity perspective. The Intel card is end-of-life with a successor named Battlemage, meaning new units may become scarce. The AMD card remains active with no successor listed. For buyers who require current availability and verified performance, the data supports the AMD card. For applications requiring many display outputs and a specific fixed clock behavior, the Intel card presents a specification-based argument, though without benchmark confirmation.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7500 | Intel Arc A380E x2 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Navi 33 | DG2-128 |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Xe-HPG |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 7,200 million |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 157 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | 45.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1500 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1700 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 6 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 96 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 186.0 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective | 1937 MHz, 15.5 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 112 | 64 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 28 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 108.8 GPixel/s | 64.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 190.4 GTexel/s | 128.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 12.19 TFLOPS | 4.096 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 24.37 TFLOPS (2:1) | 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 70 W | 130 W |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 300 W |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 |

| Length | 216 mm, 8.5 inches | 265 mm, 10.4 inches |

| Height | 115 mm, 4.5 inches | 127 mm, 5 inches |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Successor | None | Battlemage |

Both cards share the same process node, slot width of Single-slot, bus interface of PCIe 4.0 x8, width of 20 mm, and identical API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 wins in every measured performance category because it is the only card with recorded benchmarks. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 68,634 and OpenCL score of 58,213 demonstrate strong cross-API performance. The Passmark G3D score of 13,368 and GPU Compute score of 5,910 provide measurable graphics and compute baselines. The card's 59th percentile ranking among all GPUs confirms it sits above the median.

The AMD card wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. The 8 GB GDDR6 configuration with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth provides a 2 GB capacity advantage and 70 GB/s bandwidth advantage over the Intel card. For workloads that scale with memory footprint and transfer speed, the AMD card has the specification-level advantage.

The AMD card wins on compute density. Its 12.19 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.37 TFLOPS FP16 are exactly three times the Intel card's figures. The 28 ray tracing cores versus 8 represents the largest relative gap in the specification comparison. Power efficiency also favors AMD, with 70 W TDP versus 130 W, and no external power connector required.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 wins on clock speed. Its fixed 2000 MHz base and boost clocks exceed the AMD card's 1500 MHz base and 1700 MHz boost. This fixed clock behavior might appeal to applications requiring predictable timing.

The Intel card wins on display output count and type. It provides 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 connectors versus the AMD card's 4x DisplayPort 2.1. For multi-display configurations beyond four screens, the Intel card has a clear specification advantage.

The Intel card wins on physical footprint considerations. It is longer and taller, which may not be an advantage in most contexts, but the card's dimensions are recorded, and its end-of-life status with a named successor, Battlemage, indicates a defined product lineage.

The database shows no benchmark wins for either card in head-to-head tests, as no such tests are recorded. The wins described here derive from specification comparisons and the AMD card's absolute benchmark scores. The Intel card's theoretical capabilities cannot be verified against the AMD card's measured results without recorded benchmark data for the Intel product.