AMD Radeon R9 M265X vs Intel Arc A310 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains a single direct head-to-head comparison between the AMD Radeon R9 M265X and the Intel Arc A310, and it is decisively one-sided. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Intel Arc A310 scores 30,607 points, while the AMD Radeon R9 M265X manages 8,851 points. The delta percentage of -71.1% indicates that the AMD part trails the Intel part by a massive margin, roughly 3.5 times slower in raw compute throughput. This is not a close contest; it is a generational chasm reflected in a single benchmark metric.

Looking at the broader database averages, the picture remains consistent. The Intel Arc A310 carries an average benchmark score of 7,550 across all recorded tests, while the AMD Radeon R9 M265X posts an average of 8,851. Interestingly, the AMD card actually has a higher average score than the Intel card, but this is due to the composition of the test suites. The Intel card's average is dragged down by its low scores in older DirectX API tests, while its OpenCL score is far superior. The AMD card only has one recorded benchmark, which is its OpenCL score, so its average is identical to that single result.

The percentile rankings reinforce the disparity in modern workloads. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X sits at the 44th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the Intel Arc A310 ranks at the 40th percentile. Despite the Intel card being slower in this overall percentile ranking, the OpenCL head-to-head tells a different story. The Intel part's modern architecture excels in compute-heavy tasks, while the AMD part's older GCN 1.0 design struggles to keep pace.

The nearest rivals for the AMD Radeon R9 M265X include the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (average score 8,863, delta of -0.1%), the AMD Radeon 550X (8,918, -0.8%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8,746, 1.2%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 (8,743, 1.2%). These deltas are all within 1.2%, meaning the AMD R9 M265X is statistically indistinguishable from these cards in the database's aggregate metrics. It is firmly a mid-lower tier part from its era.

For the Intel Arc A310, its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R7 250 (7,557, -0.1%), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7,580, -0.4%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7,472, 1%), and the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7,447, 1.4%). Again, these are tight clusters. The Intel card sits right alongside the GTX 1650 in average score, which is a notable comparison for a card that is often considered entry-level. However, the OpenCL result for the Intel card is far above these rivals, indicating that its compute performance is disproportionately strong relative to its overall average.

The wins tally is stark: the AMD Radeon R9 M265X records zero wins, while the Intel Arc A310 records one win in the only shared benchmark. This is not a balanced rivalry. The data suggests that any modern compute workload would heavily favor the Intel part.

The Verdict

The benchmark results are unambiguous. The Intel Arc A310 is the superior GPU for any task that relies on OpenCL compute. Its score of 30,607 in Geekbench OpenCL is more than three times the AMD Radeon R9 M265X's score of 8,851. The delta percentage of -71.1% in favor of Intel is one of the largest gaps recorded for a head-to-head in this database segment. Anyone considering these two cards for compute acceleration, machine learning inference, or general GPGPU work should choose the Intel Arc A310 without hesitation.

The AMD Radeon R9 M265X does have a higher average benchmark score (8,851 vs. 7,550) and a higher percentile ranking (44th vs. 40th). This is because the AMD card's single recorded test is its strong OpenCL result, while the Intel card's average includes several low scores in legacy DirectX tests. But these aggregate metrics do not reflect the modern workload reality. The Intel card's low DirectX scores are in 9, 10, 11, and 12 API tests that appear to be Passmark subtests, and they are not representative of its actual gaming or compute capability in current applications.

For gaming, the data is less complete, but the architecture differences suggest the Intel card should be preferred. The Intel Arc A310 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the AMD Radeon R9 M265X only supports DirectX 12 (11_1). This means the Intel card can handle modern rendering features like ray tracing and mesh shaders, while the AMD card is limited to older API levels. The Intel card also has dedicated ray tracing cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely.

The verdict is straightforward: the Intel Arc A310 is the modern, capable part, while the AMD Radeon R9 M265X is a legacy product that should only be considered for very specific older workloads or as a collector's item. The data does not support any scenario where the AMD card is the better choice for current applications.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast, reflecting their respective release dates and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X uses the Venus chip, built on the Graphics Core Next 1.0 architecture, often abbreviated as GCN 1.0. This is a first-generation design from AMD's GCN era, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 1,500 million transistors on a die size of 123 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 12.2 million transistors per square millimeter.

The Intel Arc A310, by contrast, uses the DG2-128 chip, based on the Xe-HPG architecture. This is Intel's high-performance gaming architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. The chip contains 7,200 million transistors, which is nearly five times the transistor count of the AMD part, on a die size of 157 mm². This yields a transistor density of 45.9 million transistors per square millimeter, almost four times denser than the AMD chip.

The process node difference is significant: 28 nm versus 6 nm. This four-generation jump in process technology allows Intel to pack far more logic into a similar physical footprint. The transistor density difference is stark, and it directly translates to the performance gap observed in the benchmarks. The Intel card also has dedicated ray tracing cores, 6 in total, while the AMD card has no ray tracing hardware whatsoever. This is a fundamental feature difference that cannot be compensated by clock speeds or memory bandwidth.

The memory subsystems also differ fundamentally. The AMD card uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 64 GB/s. The Intel card uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 124 GB/s. Despite having half the bus width, the Intel card achieves nearly double the bandwidth thanks to faster memory clock speeds and the newer GDDR6 standard. This is a critical difference for texture-heavy workloads and high-resolution rendering.

The shading and texture resources are also different. The AMD card has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). The Intel card has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. While the AMD card has more TMUs, the Intel card has more shading units and a higher clock speed, which gives it a significant advantage in raw throughput. The pixel rate for the AMD card is 10 GPixel/s, while the Intel card achieves 28 GPixel/s. The texture rate is 25 GTexel/s for AMD and 56 GTexel/s for Intel. Both metrics show the Intel card at roughly 2.2 to 2.8 times the rate of the AMD card.

Specification Differences

The specifications that differ between these two cards are numerous and telling. The most obvious difference is the process node: 28 nm for AMD versus 6 nm for Intel. The transistor count is 1,500 million versus 7,200 million, and the die size is 123 mm² versus 157 mm². The transistor density is 12.2 million per mm² versus 45.9 million per mm².

Clock speeds show a massive difference. The AMD card has a base clock of 575 MHz and a boost clock of 625 MHz, while the Intel card runs at a constant 1750 MHz for both base and boost. The memory clock is 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for AMD, while the Intel card runs at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective). This clock speed difference is a major contributor to the performance gap.

The memory configuration differs in size, type, and bandwidth. AMD offers 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64 GB/s bandwidth. Intel offers 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124 GB/s bandwidth. The bus interface also differs: the AMD card uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Intel card uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The Intel card's PCIe 4.0 interface provides more bandwidth per lane than the older PCIe 3.0 standard.

The compute capabilities are also different. The AMD card has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the Intel card has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The AMD card's FP32 performance is 800 GFLOPS, while the Intel card achieves 2.688 TFLOPS, more than three times higher. The Intel card also has FP16 performance of 5.376 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the AMD card has no recorded FP16 performance. The Intel card has 6 ray tracing cores, while the AMD card has none.

Thermal and power specifications differ as well. The AMD card has no recorded TDP, while the Intel card has a TDP of 30 W. The Intel card is single-slot, has no power connectors, and suggests a 200 W power supply. The AMD card has no recorded dimensions or power requirements. Display outputs also differ: the Intel card features 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0, while the AMD card has no recorded display outputs.

The API support is another key differentiator. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Intel card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX 12 Ultimate support on the Intel card enables hardware ray tracing, mesh shaders, and other modern features that the AMD card cannot handle. The release dates are also far apart: the AMD card was released on 2014-03-20, while the Intel card was released on 2022-10-11. Both are now end-of-life products, but the Intel card is nearly a decade newer.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The Intel Arc A310 is significantly faster, scoring 30,607 points in Geekbench OpenCL compared to the AMD Radeon R9 M265X's 8,851 points. This represents a 71.1% margin in favor of Intel.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R9 M265X have any advantages over the Intel Arc A310?

A: The AMD card has a higher average benchmark score (8,851 vs. 7,550) and a higher percentile rank (44th vs. 40th). It also has more texture mapping units (40 vs. 32) and a wider memory bus (128-bit vs. 64-bit), though the Intel card achieves higher bandwidth despite the narrower bus.

Q: Can the AMD Radeon R9 M265X handle ray tracing?

A: No. The AMD card has no ray tracing cores and only supports DirectX 12 (11_1). The Intel Arc A310 has 6 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which enables hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between these two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M265X has 64 GB/s of bandwidth using 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The Intel Arc A310 has 124 GB/s of bandwidth using 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, nearly double the bandwidth despite half the bus width.

Q: Which card is more power efficient?

A: The Intel Arc A310 has a recorded TDP of 30 W and requires no external power connectors, suggesting a 200 W power supply. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X has no recorded TDP in the database. Based on the available data, the Intel card appears to deliver far higher performance within a modest power envelope.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M265X has a transistor density of 12.2 million per square millimeter, while the Intel Arc A310 has a density of 45.9 million per square millimeter. This is due to the 28 nm process for AMD versus the 6 nm process for Intel.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Arc A310:

• OpenCL compute: The Intel card wins the only head-to-head benchmark with a score of 30,607 versus 8,851, a 71.1% advantage.
• Modern API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus DirectX 12 (11_1) means the Intel card can run modern games and applications with advanced features.
• Ray tracing: The Intel card has 6 dedicated ray tracing cores; the AMD card has none.
• Memory bandwidth: 124 GB/s versus 64 GB/s, despite the AMD card having a wider bus.
• FP32 performance: 2.688 TFLOPS versus 800 GFLOPS, more than three times the compute throughput.
• Process technology: 6 nm versus 28 nm, giving the Intel card a massive efficiency and density advantage.
• PCIe interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16, offering more modern bandwidth capabilities.

AMD Radeon R9 M265X:

• Average benchmark score: The AMD card has a higher average score (8,851 vs. 7,550), though this is based on a single test.
• Percentile ranking: The AMD card ranks at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, versus the Intel card's 40th percentile.
• Texture mapping units: The AMD card has 40 TMUs versus the Intel card's 32, which could help in certain texture-heavy workloads.
• Memory bus width: The AMD card has a 128-bit bus versus the Intel card's 64-bit bus, though this does not translate to higher bandwidth.
• Release date legacy: The AMD card was released in 2014, making it a product of the GCN 1.0 era, while the Intel card is from 2022.

The data shows that the Intel Arc A310 is the clear winner for any modern workload. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X only wins in aggregate metrics that are skewed by the limited test data available. For real-world compute, gaming, and modern API support, the Intel card is the only reasonable choice based on the recorded benchmarks.