AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 vs Intel Arc A530M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Arc A530M decisively outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 in every benchmark recorded, with its most commanding lead coming in compute-heavy workloads. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Arc A530M scores 49,735 against the WX 7100's 40,148, a 23.9% advantage that places it in a different performance class entirely. This is not a marginal victory; it is a substantial gap that will translate directly into faster rendering, simulation, and data-processing tasks.

The Vulkan results tell a similar but slightly narrower story. The Arc A530M posts 43,492 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the WX 7100 manages 39,683. That 9.6% lead confirms the Intel part's superiority in modern graphics APIs, though the closer margin suggests the AMD card remains more competitive in driver-optimized legacy workloads. Still, the data is unambiguous: the Arc A530M wins both head-to-head matchups, giving it a clean 2-0 record over the WX 7100.

Context from the nearest-rival data reinforces how much faster the Intel part is. The Arc A530M's average benchmark score of 46,614 places it at the 85th percentile of all GPUs, while the WX 7100's 40,063 average sits at the 82nd percentile. The Intel card's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 5600M, scores 46,601 — a negligible 0% delta — while the WX 7100's closest competitor, the AMD Radeon Pro 580, scores 40,318, just 0.6% higher. The performance separation between the two cards in question is roughly equivalent to the gap between their respective peer groups, confirming that the Arc A530M operates in a meaningfully higher performance tier.

One notable pattern emerges when examining individual benchmark deltas. The OpenCL gap of 23.9% is more than double the Vulkan gap of 9.6%. This suggests the Arc A530M's architecture is particularly well-suited to general-purpose compute tasks, where its newer design and higher transistor density provide outsized benefits. The WX 7100, by contrast, narrows the deficit in Vulkan, a lower-level API that can sometimes favor older but more mature driver stacks. Regardless, the verdict from the numbers alone is clear: the Arc A530M is the faster GPU in every tested scenario.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent fundamentally different eras of GPU design. The Intel Arc A530M uses the DG2-256 chip built on TSMC's 6 nm process, packing 11,500 million transistors into a 269 mm² die for a density of 42.8M transistors per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 uses the Ellesmere chip on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die — a density of just 24.6M per square millimeter. Intel's transistor density advantage is nearly 74%, a direct consequence of the newer fabrication node.

Architecturally, the Intel part employs Xe-HPG, the same architecture used in the Alchemist generation of Arc mobile GPUs. The AMD card uses GCN 4.0, the architecture behind the Radeon Pro Polaris family. This generational gap manifests in several key feature differences. The Arc A530M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the WX 7100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6, but the Intel part's newer API compliance gives it access to more advanced rendering features such as mesh shaders and variable-rate shading.

The compute resources are configured very differently. The Arc A530M has 1,536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs, along with 12 dedicated ray-tracing cores. The WX 7100 has more shading units at 2,304 and more TMUs at 144, but only 32 ROPs and no ray-tracing hardware whatsoever. This explains the benchmark results: AMD's higher shader count yields a higher theoretical FP32 throughput of 5.728 TFLOPS versus the Intel part's 3.994 TFLOPS, yet the Intel card still wins real-world tests. The Arc A530M's ray-tracing cores and newer architecture clearly extract more practical performance per FLOP.

Memory configurations are similar in capacity but different in technology. Both cards feature 8 GB of VRAM with 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth, but the Arc A530M uses GDDR6 at 14 Gbps effective on a 128-bit bus, while the WX 7100 uses GDDR5 at 7 Gbps effective on a 256-bit bus. The wider bus of the AMD card compensates for its slower memory clock, resulting in identical bandwidth — a rare case of technical parity in an otherwise lopsided comparison. The Intel part also supports FP16 at 7.987 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the AMD card's FP16 throughput equals its FP32 at 5.728 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, making the Intel card markedly faster in mixed-precision workloads.

Process node and power draw further separate the two. The Arc A530M is built on 6 nm and consumes 65 W, while the WX 7100 on 14 nm draws 130 W. That means the Intel card delivers superior performance at half the power envelope — a remarkable efficiency advantage. The WX 7100 requires a 300 W suggested PSU and a single 6-pin power connector, whereas the Arc A530M is an IGP with no power connector at all, designed for mobile integration.

The Verdict

The data leaves no room for ambiguity: the Intel Arc A530M is the superior GPU for anyone prioritizing raw performance, modern features, or power efficiency. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks with deltas of 23.9% in OpenCL and 9.6% in Vulkan, and it does so while consuming half the power of the AMD card. Its 85th percentile ranking versus the WX 7100's 82nd confirms it sits in a higher overall performance tier.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 retains one significant advantage: it is a desktop card with a single-slot form factor, 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, and a 241 mm length — making it attractive for professional workstation builds that need multiple display outputs and a fixed installation. The Arc A530M, as a mobile IGP, offers no such flexibility; its display outputs are explicitly "portable device dependent." If your use case demands a dedicated workstation card with multiple simultaneous displays, the WX 7100's physical design may be the deciding factor despite its slower performance.

For compute-heavy tasks, rendering, or modern gaming, the Arc A530M's newer architecture, ray-tracing cores, and higher API support make it the clear choice. The WX 7100's higher FP32 throughput (5.728 TFLOPS vs 3.994 TFLOPS) does not translate into benchmark wins, indicating that architectural efficiency outweighs raw shader count. The Intel part's GDDR6 memory, 12 ray-tracing cores, and DirectX 12 Ultimate support future-proof it in ways the GCN 4.0-based AMD card simply cannot match.

The production status reinforces this verdict. The Arc A530M is listed as "Active," while the WX 7100 is "End-of-life" — a distinction that matters for long-term driver support and availability. If you are selecting a GPU today, the Intel part is the forward-looking option; the AMD card is a legacy product, released in 2016, whose successor was the Radeon Pro Vega.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc A530M | AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 |

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

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | GCN 4.0 |

| Generation | Alchemist (Arc 5 Mobile) | Radeon Pro Polaris (WX x100) |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 11,500 million | 5,700 million |

| Die Size | 269 mm² | 232 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 42.8M / mm² | 24.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 900 MHz | 1188 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1300 MHz | 1243 MHz |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Effective Speed | 14 Gbps | 7 Gbps |

| Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 2304 |

| TMUs | 96 | 144 |

| ROPs | 48 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 12 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 62.40 GPixel/s | 39.78 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 124.8 GTexel/s | 179.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.994 TFLOPS | 5.728 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 7.987 TFLOPS (2:1) | 5.728 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 65 W | 130 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | None | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

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

| Release Date | 2023-07-31 | 2016-11-09 |

| Length | Not specified | 241 mm (9.5 inches) |

| Height | Not specified | 112 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Predecessor | Not specified | Radeon Pro GCN |

| Successor | Not specified | Radeon Pro Vega |

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Arc A530M wins both recorded benchmarks. It scores 49,735 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 40,148 for the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100, and 43,492 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 39,683.

Q: How much faster is the Intel Arc A530M in OpenCL?

A: The Arc A530M is 23.9% faster than the WX 7100 in Geekbench OpenCL, its largest winning margin across all tests.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 have any ray tracing support?

A: No. The WX 7100 has no ray tracing cores, while the Intel Arc A530M includes 12 dedicated ray tracing cores.

Q: Which card has better power efficiency?

A: The Intel Arc A530M has a 65 W TDP, less than half of the WX 7100's 130 W TDP, while delivering higher benchmark scores.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. The Intel Arc A530M is listed as "Active," while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 is "End-of-life."

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each card?

A: Both cards have identical 224.0 GB/s bandwidth, despite different implementations: the Arc A530M uses GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, while the WX 7100 uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A530M wins in every performance category measured. Its 23.9% OpenCL lead makes it the clear choice for compute-heavy applications like machine learning inference, scientific simulation, and video encoding, where the newer Xe-HPG architecture and FP16 support at 7.987 TFLOPS provide a decisive edge. Its 9.6% Vulkan advantage, combined with DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 support, makes it the better option for gaming or any workload leveraging modern graphics APIs. The 12 ray-tracing cores give it capabilities the WX 7100 simply lacks, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing in supported titles. Its 65 W power envelope means it can be deployed in thin-and-light laptops or compact systems where the 130 W WX 7100 would be impractical.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 wins in scenarios where its physical form factor and display connectivity are paramount. As a single-slot card with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, it supports multi-monitor professional setups directly — the Arc A530M's outputs are "portable device dependent," meaning they vary by laptop implementation. The WX 7100's 241 mm length and 112 mm height make it a standard desktop workstation component, easily installed in any tower chassis with a 300 W PSU. Its higher FP32 throughput of 5.728 TFLOPS, while not translating to benchmark wins, could theoretically benefit legacy compute codes that are not optimized for newer architectures. Its predecessor status as the Radeon Pro GCN successor and its end-of-life production status, however, mean it is best suited for maintenance of existing workstation fleets rather than new deployments.

In practical terms, the choice comes down to form factor versus performance. If you need a drop-in workstation card with multiple DisplayPort outputs and can accept slower benchmark results, the WX 7100 has a role. If you want the faster GPU — and the data consistently shows the Arc A530M is faster — the Intel part is the superior investment, provided your system can accommodate its mobile IGP design.