AMD Radeon PRO W7900 vs Intel Arc A310E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 and the Intel Arc A310E. This absence of shared test data is itself informative: these two GPUs occupy such different performance strata that benchmark suites rarely place them in the same comparison set.

For the AMD Radeon PRO W7900, the recorded Geekbench OpenCL score is 84,379, while its Geekbench Vulkan score reaches 137,070. The average benchmark score across all recorded tests for the W7900 is 110,725. This places the card at the 94th percentile of all GPUs in the database, a position that indicates it sits among the top 6 percent of all recorded graphics hardware.

The Intel Arc A310E has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. Its average benchmark score is listed as 0, and its percentile rank sits at 50, which represents the median position of all GPUs. The absence of test data prevents any direct numerical comparison between the two cards. The W7900's 94th percentile versus the A310E's 50th percentile, however, frames the gap in rank terms: the W7900 outperforms the vast majority of recorded GPUs, while the A310E sits exactly at the midpoint.

The nearest rivals for the W7900 provide additional context for its performance tier. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile holds an average score of 113,944, which is 2.8 percent higher than the W7900's average. The NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB records 114,395, also 3.2 percent higher. On the lower side, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II scores 109,617, just 1 percent below the W7900, and the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X scores 107,342, which is 3.2 percent lower. The W7900 therefore sits in a tightly contested cluster where the nearest recorded rivals all fall within roughly a 3 percent band. The A310E has no nearest rivals recorded at all, which reinforces its position outside the competitive range of the W7900.

Architecture Differences

The two cards diverge sharply at the silicon level. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 uses the Navi 31 chip, built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the codename Plum Bonito, and belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The Intel Arc A310E uses the DG2-128 chip, built on the Xe-HPG architecture, and belongs to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation.

Process technology separates them by one node step. The W7900 is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the A310E uses a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. Transistor counts reflect the scale difference: the W7900 packs 57,700 million transistors across a die size of 529 mm², yielding a transistor density of 109.1 million per mm². The A310E contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, for a density of 45.9 million per mm². The W7900 therefore carries roughly eight times the transistor count and more than double the transistor density.

Execution resources follow the same pattern. The W7900 has 6,144 shading units, 384 texture mapping units, 192 render output units, and 96 ray tracing cores. The A310E has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 RT cores. The W7900's shading unit count is eight times higher, and its RT core count is sixteen times higher.

Clock behavior differs as well. The W7900 runs at a base clock of 1760 MHz with a boost of 2495 MHz. The A310E runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost. Despite its higher absolute clocks, the A310E's much smaller execution array produces far lower throughput. The FP32 compute figure for the W7900 is 61.32 TFLOPS, while the A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS. The FP16 numbers also diverge: the W7900 reaches 61.32 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the A310E reaches 6.144 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The W7900's FP32 output is exactly twenty times the A310E's.

Memory architecture widens the gap further. The W7900 uses 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384 bit bus, producing a bandwidth of 864.0 GB/s. The A310E uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64 bit bus, producing 124.0 GB/s. That is a 12x difference in capacity and a 7x difference in bandwidth. Memory clocks also differ: the W7900 runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), the A310E at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective).

Pixel and texture rates reflect the resource disparity. The W7900 reaches 479.0 GPixel/s and 958.1 GTexel/s. The A310E reaches 32.00 GPixel/s and 64.00 GTexel/s. The W7900 is roughly 15x faster in pixel throughput and 15x faster in texture throughput.

The cards share the same API support: both list DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The bus interfaces differ, with the W7900 using PCIe 4.0 x16 and the A310E using PCIe 4.0 x8.

Where Each One Wins

The data indicates that the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 wins in every measured compute category. Its 61.32 TFLOPS FP32 figure exceeds the A310E's 3.072 TFLOPS by twenty times. Its 864.0 GB/s memory bandwidth exceeds the A310E's 124.0 GB/s by roughly seven times. Its 96 RT cores versus 6 RT cores gives it a sixteen-fold advantage in ray tracing hardware. Its 48 GB memory capacity is twelve times the A310E's 4 GB.

The Intel Arc A310E wins only in categories tied to power and physical footprint. Its TDP is 75 W versus 295 W for the W7900. It requires no power connectors, while the W7900 uses two 8-pin connectors. Its suggested power supply is 250 W, while the W7900 calls for 600 W. The A310E is a single-slot card measuring 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. The W7900 is a triple-slot card measuring 280 mm by 110 mm by 51 mm. The A310E also supports four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the W7900 offers three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs plus one mini-DisplayPort 2.1.

Production status separates them as well. The W7900 is listed as Active and was released on 2023-05-25, with a predecessor of Radeon Pro Vega. The A310E is listed as End-of-life, released on 2024-03-31, with a predecessor of Xe Graphics and a successor of Battlemage. The A310E's shorter lifecycle, ending in a successor designation, suggests it was positioned for a different market segment than the W7900's ongoing professional role.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 in FP32 compute?

A: The W7900 delivers 61.32 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS. The W7900 is exactly twenty times faster in this metric.

Q: What memory capacity does each card offer?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384 bit bus with 864.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc A310E has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64 bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What percentile ranking does each card hold in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 ranks at the 94th percentile of all GPUs. The Intel Arc A310E ranks at the 50th percentile.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A310E have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists no benchmark entries for the A310E, and its average benchmark score is recorded as 0. The W7900 has recorded Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores of 84,379 and 137,070 respectively.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has a TDP of 295 W, uses two 8-pin power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 600 W. The Intel Arc A310E has a TDP of 75 W, uses no power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: What are the production statuses of the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is listed as Active. The Intel Arc A310E is listed as End-of-life, with a successor named Battlemage.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to two cards designed for entirely different workloads. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is a professional compute card with a 94th percentile rank, 48 GB of memory, 61.32 TFLOPS FP32, and an Active production status. Its nearest rivals in the database, the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile and NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB, sit within roughly 3 percent of its average score, which places it in a competitive professional tier. The W7900's 96 RT cores and 864.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for compute-heavy and memory-intensive tasks.

The Intel Arc A310E, with its 50th percentile rank and no recorded benchmark scores, occupies the median position of all GPUs in the database. Its 75 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of power connectors make it a low-power option. Its End-of-life status and successor designation indicate the architecture has already been superseded. The 4 GB memory capacity and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth are far below the W7900's figures.

For users selecting between these two based strictly on the database measurements, the W7900 wins every performance metric by substantial margins. The A310E wins on power draw, physical size, and installation flexibility. The choice rests on whether the workload demands compute throughput or minimal power footprint.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7900 | Intel Arc A310E |

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

| Chip | Navi 31 | DG2-128 |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Xe-HPG |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) | Alchemist (Arc 3) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 57,700 million | 7,200 million |

| Die Size | 529 mm² | 157 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 109.1M / mm² | 45.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1760 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2495 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective | 1937 MHz 15.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 48 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 864.0 GB/s | 124.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 6144 | 768 |

| TMUs | 384 | 32 |

| ROPs | 192 | 16 |

| RT Cores | 96 | 6 |

| Pixel Rate | 479.0 GPixel/s | 32.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 958.1 GTexel/s | 64.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 61.32 TFLOPS | 3.072 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 61.32 TFLOPS (1:1) | 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 295 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | Triple-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 | 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 |

| Dimensions | 280 mm x 110 mm x 51 mm | 168 mm x 69 mm x 20 mm |

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

| Release Date | 2023-05-25 | 2024-03-31 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro Vega | Xe Graphics |

| Successor | None | Battlemage |

| Launch MSRP | 3,999 USD | Not listed |

| Percentile Vs All GPUs | 94 | 50 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 110725 | 0 |