AMD Radeon PRO W7900 vs Intel Arc A380E x2 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The data presents an unusual head-to-head scenario because the Intel Arc A380E x2 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has two recorded results. The AMD card delivers an average benchmark score of 110,725, placing it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs tracked. The Intel card sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of zero, meaning the database contains no verified performance measurements for it. Consequently, the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 wins every measurable comparison by default, but the nature of each win differs by workload type.

In OpenCL compute workloads, the Radeon PRO W7900 records a Geekbench score of 84,379. This result reflects general-purpose GPU compute performance, which is relevant for rendering, simulation, and data-parallel tasks. In Vulkan workloads, the same card records a Geekbench score of 137,070, which is substantially higher than its OpenCL result. The gap between the two scores indicates that the Radeon PRO W7900 scales better under the Vulkan API, which is common for modern graphics-heavy applications and game engines. The Intel Arc A380E x2, by contrast, has no Geekbench OpenCL or Vulkan entries, so no comparative statement can be made about its API-specific behavior.

The AMD card also wins on raw specification-driven throughput categories. Its pixel rate of 479.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 958.1 GTexel/s dwarf the Intel card's 64.00 GPixel/s and 128.0 GTexel/s. These figures suggest that the Radeon PRO W7900 is designed for high-resolution, texture-intensive workloads, whereas the Intel Arc A380E x2 targets lower-throughput environments. The FP32 compute rate reinforces this split: 61.32 TFLOPS for AMD versus 4.096 TFLOPS for Intel, a roughly 15-fold difference. The Intel card does win in one compute ratio: its FP16 rate of 8.192 TFLOPS is double its FP32 rate, indicating a 2:1 FP16/FP32 ratio, while the AMD card delivers equal FP16 and FP32 rates at 61.32 TFLOPS each. For workloads that use FP16 arithmetic, the Intel card's architecture dedicates more relative throughput to half-precision math, though the absolute FP16 output remains far lower.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural families and manufacturing processes. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 uses the Navi 31 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Plum Bonito. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi generation, which the database labels as Navi III Series. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the DG2-128 chip built on Xe-HPG architecture and belongs to the Alchemist generation under the Arc 3 branding. Both chips are fabricated by TSMC, but at different nodes: AMD uses a 5 nm process, while Intel uses a 6 nm process.

The transistor counts differ substantially. The Navi 31 chip contains 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 109.1 million transistors per square millimeter. The DG2-128 chip contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a density of 45.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The AMD chip is roughly eight times larger in transistor count and 3.4 times larger in die area. The density gap reflects the newer process node and the larger, more complex compute architecture.

Memory architecture also differs fundamentally. The Radeon PRO W7900 uses 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, achieving 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, achieving 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Memory clocks differ as well: AMD runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate, while Intel runs at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective. The AMD card's memory subsystem delivers 4.6 times the bandwidth of the Intel card, which matters for large datasets, high-resolution textures, and multi-display output.

Compute resource counts follow the same pattern. The Radeon PRO W7900 has 6,144 shading units, 384 texture mapping units, 192 render output units, and 96 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc A380E x2 has 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 render output units, and 8 ray tracing cores. In every category, the AMD card has six times the resources or more. The Intel card's FP16 ratio advantage (2:1 versus 1:1) is the only architectural feature where Intel's design differs in a way that favors it, but the absolute numbers remain far behind.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has an average benchmark score of 110,725, placing it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs. The Intel Arc A380E x2 has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits in the 50th percentile, with no recorded benchmark entries in the database.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The Radeon PRO W7900 delivers 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth from 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus. The Arc A380E x2 delivers 186.0 GB/s from 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus.

Q: What are the FP16 compute capabilities of each GPU?

A: The Radeon PRO W7900 delivers 61.32 TFLOPS of FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio with its FP32 rate. The Arc A380E x2 delivers 8.192 TFLOPS of FP16 performance at a 2:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 throughput is double its FP32 throughput.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The Radeon PRO W7900 has 96 ray tracing cores. The Arc A380E x2 has 8 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two cards?

A: The Radeon PRO W7900 uses TSMC's 5 nm process, while the Arc A380E x2 uses TSMC's 6 nm process. Both are fabricated by TSMC.

Q: Which GPU supports more display outputs?

A: The Arc A380E x2 supports 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The Radeon PRO W7900 supports 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field in the database. Process node: 5 nm for AMD versus 6 nm for Intel. Transistor count: 57,700 million versus 7,200 million. Die size: 529 mm² versus 157 mm². Transistor density: 109.1 million per mm² versus 45.9 million per mm². Base clock: 1760 MHz versus 2000 MHz. Boost clock: 2495 MHz versus 2000 MHz. Memory clock: 2250 MHz at 18 Gbps effective versus 1937 MHz at 15.5 Gbps effective. Memory size: 48 GB versus 6 GB. Memory type is GDDR6 for both, but bus width is 384-bit versus 96-bit. Bandwidth: 864.0 GB/s versus 186.0 GB/s.

Shading units: 6,144 versus 1,024. Texture mapping units: 384 versus 64. Render output units: 192 versus 32. Ray tracing cores: 96 versus 8. Pixel rate: 479.0 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 958.1 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s. FP32 performance: 61.32 TFLOPS versus 4.096 TFLOPS. FP16 performance: 61.32 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio versus 8.192 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio. TDP: 295 W versus 130 W. Slot width: triple-slot versus single-slot. Power connectors: 2x 8-pin versus 1x 6-pin. Suggested PSU: 600 W versus 300 W. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs: 3x DisplayPort 2.1 plus 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 versus 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0. Dimensions: 280 mm by 110 mm by 51 mm versus 265 mm by 127 mm by 20 mm. Production status: Active versus End-of-life. Release date: 2023-05-25 versus 2024-03-31. The AMD card lists a launch MSRP of 3,999 USD; the Intel card has no launch MSRP recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for this pair, and the Intel Arc A380E x2 has no standalone benchmark scores. The only measurable comparisons come from the AMD card's recorded results and its position among nearest rivals.

The Radeon PRO W7900's Geekbench Vulkan score of 137,070 is the higher of its two recorded results. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 84,379 is lower by roughly 62 percent. This difference shows the AMD card's Vulkan driver path extracts more performance than its OpenCL path for the same hardware. Because the Intel card has no scores in either test, the database cannot confirm whether Intel's architecture would show a similar API preference.

The nearest rival data for the Radeon PRO W7900 provides context for its performance level. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II has an average score of 109,617, which is 1 percent below the W7900's average of 110,725. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600X scores 107,342, which is 3.2 percent below the W7900. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile scores 113,944, which is 2.8 percent above the W7900. The NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB scores 114,395, which is 3.2 percent above the W7900. The W7900 therefore sits in a tight performance band where its closest rivals are within roughly 3 percentage points in either direction.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 has no nearest rival entries, so the database provides no comparable score for it. Its 50th percentile placement, combined with a zero average score, indicates that the card either has not been tested or has not produced valid results. The AMD card's 94th percentile placement, by contrast, places it near the top of the database. The 44-percentile gap between the two cards is the clearest ranking signal available.

The specification-level comparison produces the largest wins for AMD. The Radeon PRO W7900's FP32 rate of 61.32 TFLOPS is 15 times the Arc A380E x2's 4.096 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 479.0 GPixel/s is 7.5 times the Intel card's 64.00 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 958.1 GTexel/s is 7.5 times the Intel card's 128.0 GTexel/s. Its memory bandwidth of 864.0 GB/s is 4.6 times the Intel card's 186.0 GB/s. Its ray tracing core count of 96 is 12 times the Intel card's 8. The Intel card's only wins are its higher base clock (2000 MHz versus 1760 MHz), its higher FP16 ratio (2:1 versus 1:1), its single-slot width, its lower TDP (130 W versus 295 W), and its larger display output count (8 versus 4).

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear separation between these two GPUs. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is an active, high-end workstation card with a 94th percentile ranking, a 110,725 average benchmark score, and a 3,999 USD launch MSRP. Its 48 GB memory pool, 864.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 61.32 TFLOPS FP32 throughput position it for large-scale compute, high-resolution rendering, and multi-display professional workloads. Its nearest rivals are all within 3.2 percent of its average score, which places it in a competitive but established performance tier.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 is an end-of-life product with no recorded benchmark scores, no nearest rivals, and a 50th percentile placement. Its 6 GB memory pool, 186.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 4.096 TFLOPS FP32 throughput suggest a much lighter workload profile, and its 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs indicate a focus on multi-display output rather than raw compute. Its single-slot design and 130 W TDP make it suitable for space-constrained or power-limited systems, but the database contains no performance evidence to validate its real-world behavior.

Buyers who need maximum compute throughput, large memory capacity, and proven benchmark results should select the AMD Radeon PRO W7900. Buyers who need a compact, low-power card with many display outputs and have no requirement for recorded compute performance may consider the Intel Arc A380E x2, but they must do so without any benchmark validation in the database. The data favors AMD on every measured performance axis.