AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 vs Intel Arc A580 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear two-test head-to-head sweep for the Intel Arc A580. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Arc A580 scores 91657 against the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200's 69774, a 23.9% deficit for the AMD card. That is a substantial margin, indicating the Intel part sustains much higher raw compute throughput in this API. The gap narrows in Geekbench Vulkan: the Arc A580 posts 79381 while the WX 8200 reaches 69076, a 13% difference. While still a win for Intel, the smaller delta suggests the AMD architecture closes some of its disadvantage under Vulkan's lower-level execution model.

Looking at average benchmark scores, the picture becomes more nuanced. The WX 8200 averages 69870 across its recorded tests, while the Arc A580 averages 57756. That average is dragged down by the Arc's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 2229, a workload that does not exist for the AMD card. The percentile rankings tell a similar story: the WX 8200 sits at the 90th percentile among all GPUs, while the Arc A580 ranks at the 87th. So despite losing both head-to-head matchups, the AMD card holds a higher overall standing in the database.

For context, the WX 8200's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 at 69986 (0.2% higher), the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile at 70140 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE at 70829 (1.4% higher). The Arc A580's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM at 58085 (0.6% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE at 57367 (0.7% lower), and the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT at 58392 (1.1% higher). These deltas are all small, meaning each card sits in a tight performance cluster relative to its peers.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The Intel Arc A580 wins decisively. It scores 91657 versus the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200's 69774, a 23.9% advantage for Intel.

Q: Does the AMD card have any benchmark win?

A: No. In the recorded head-to-head tests, the WX 8200 wins zero tests, while the Arc A580 wins both. However, the AMD card holds a higher average benchmark score (69870 versus 57756) and a higher percentile rank (90th versus 87th).

Q: How does the WX 8200 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The WX 8200 is effectively tied with the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 (0.2% slower), the RTX A3000 Mobile (0.4% slower), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE (1.4% slower). It is 1.3% faster than the NVIDIA CMP 90HX.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: Both cards deliver 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The WX 8200 uses HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, while the Arc A580 uses GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Which card has higher pixel throughput?

A: The Intel Arc A580. It achieves 192.0 GPixel/s versus the AMD's 96.00 GPixel/s, exactly double the pixel fill rate.

Q: What is the transistor density comparison?

A: The Arc A580 packs 53.4M transistors per mm², more than double the WX 8200's 25.3M / mm². This reflects the newer 6 nm node versus 14 nm.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 uses the Vega 10 chip built on GCN 5.0 architecture, manufactured by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. It integrates 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die. The Intel Arc A580 uses the DG2-512 chip based on Xe-HPG architecture, built by TSMC on a 6 nm process, with 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die. The node advantage allows Intel to fit 73% more transistors into a smaller physical area.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The WX 8200 uses 8 GB of HBM2 with a 2048-bit bus, while the Arc A580 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 with a 256-bit bus. Both achieve identical 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, but through completely different methods. The AMD card's wide bus and stacked memory reflect a professional workstation heritage, while Intel's narrow bus with high-speed GDDR6 is a consumer-oriented approach.

Compute resource allocation differs as well. The WX 8200 carries 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The Arc A580 has 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. Interestingly, the Intel card has fewer shaders and TMUs but more ROPs, which explains its doubled pixel rate. The Arc A580 also includes 24 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the WX 8200, which has no RT cores listed.

API support shows generational differences. The WX 8200 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The Arc A580 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel card's DirectX 12 Ultimate designation indicates feature-level 12_2 support, which the AMD card lacks. Both cards support the same OpenGL version, but Intel's Vulkan 1.4 is newer than AMD's 1.3.

Specification Differences

Clock speeds differ notably. The WX 8200 runs at a 1200 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost, while the Arc A580 operates at 1700 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost. The Intel card runs 500 MHz higher at boost. Memory clocks also differ: the AMD card uses 1000 MHz with 2 Gbps effective, while the Intel card uses 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective.

Power requirements favor the Intel card. The WX 8200 has a 230 W TDP and requires a 550 W suggested PSU, while the Arc A580 has a 175 W TDP and a 450 W suggested PSU. The Intel card draws 55 W less under load. Power connectors also differ: the AMD card uses 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin, while the Intel card requires 2x 8-pin.

Bus interface differs by generation. The WX 8200 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Arc A580 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The newer PCIe 4.0 standard offers double the bandwidth per lane, though the practical impact depends on the workload. Display outputs also differ: the AMD card provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Intel card offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 2.0.

Physical dimensions are only listed for the AMD card: 267 mm length, 111 mm height, dual-slot width. The Intel card's dimensions are not recorded in the database. Both cards are dual-slot designs. Production status differs: the WX 8200 is end-of-life, while the Arc A580 is active. The AMD card released in August 2018 with a launch MSRP of 999 USD, while the Intel card released in October 2023 with no recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A580 wins in raw compute benchmarks. Its OpenCL score of 91657 crushes the AMD card, and its Vulkan score of 79381 also leads. The 23.9% OpenCL margin is the single largest performance gap in the comparison. This suggests the Arc A580 is the better choice for general compute workloads that leverage OpenCL, particularly those that can take advantage of higher clock speeds and the newer Xe-HPG architecture. The Arc A580 also wins decisively on pixel throughput at 192.0 GPixel/s, making it better suited for fill-rate-limited scenarios like high-resolution rasterization with heavy overdraw.

The Intel card's ray tracing cores give it a hardware feature the AMD card simply lacks. Any workload involving hardware-accelerated ray tracing will only run on the Arc A580. The Arc A580 also has a lower TDP at 175 W versus 230 W, meaning it generates less heat and requires a smaller PSU. Its PCIe 4.0 interface also provides a modern connectivity advantage.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 wins on overall standing. Its 90th percentile ranking versus the Arc A580's 87th places it higher among all GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score of 69870 exceeds the Intel card's 57756 by a significant margin, though this is partly due to the Arc's low 3DMark result. The WX 8200 also offers HBM2 memory, which historically provides better performance consistency in professional workloads due to its stacked design and very wide bus. The AMD card's 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs may suit multi-display workstation setups better than the Intel's single HDMI plus three DisplayPort configuration.

The Verdict

The data paints a split picture. For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in OpenCL and Vulkan, the Intel Arc A580 is the clear choice. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, offers ray tracing hardware, and does so with lower power draw. The 23.9% OpenCL advantage and 13% Vulkan advantage are not marginal; they represent a decisive generational leap in compute efficiency. The Arc A580's higher clock speeds and doubled pixel rate reinforce this position.

However, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 should not be dismissed. Its 90th percentile ranking and higher average benchmark score indicate it remains a strong performer in the broader GPU landscape. The HBM2 memory and professional-oriented feature set (4x mini-DisplayPort, workstation-class drivers implied by the Radeon Pro branding) make it a viable option for specific professional workflows where those attributes matter. Its end-of-life status, though, means it lacks modern features like ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate support.

For new system builds, the Intel Arc A580 is the more future-proof option. It is active in production, uses a modern 6 nm node, supports PCIe 4.0, and includes hardware ray tracing. The 175 W TDP makes it easier to cool and power. The AMD card, while still competitive in average scores, is built on older technology and carries a higher power requirement.

For legacy workstation deployments where HBM2 bandwidth and multiple mini-DisplayPort outputs are essential, the WX 8200 retains relevance. Its 512.0 GB/s bandwidth matches the Arc A580, and its 90th percentile standing shows it still outperforms most GPUs in the database. But for most users comparing these two today, the benchmark results favor the Intel Arc A580 by a meaningful margin in compute workloads, and its feature set is more aligned with current software expectations. The choice ultimately depends on whether the workload is OpenCL/Vulkan compute-heavy (Intel wins) or requires professional display outputs and HBM2 characteristics (AMD retains a niche).