AMD Radeon RX 480 vs Intel Arc A370M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits cleanly between these two GPUs. The AMD Radeon RX 480 takes every benchmark win in the head-to-head comparison, while the Intel Arc A370M has no recorded wins in the shared test suite. However, the two products occupy different worlds entirely: the RX 480 is a desktop card built for sustained throughput, while the Arc A370M is a mobile IGP designed for efficiency in portable devices.

Looking at the benchmark results, the RX 480 wins the compute-oriented workloads decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 37998 against the Arc A370M's 29676, a 28% advantage. The gap widens dramatically in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RX 480 posts 45968 versus 28673, a 60.3% lead. These are not marginal differences; they represent a substantial performance tier separation in both general-purpose compute and graphics API workloads.

The Arc A370M's strength does not show up in raw benchmark scores. Instead, its advantage lies in its physical profile and power envelope. The database shows a 35 W TDP for the Intel part against 150 W for the AMD card, making the Arc A370M the only realistic choice for thin-and-light notebooks where the RX 480's desktop dual-slot design with a 1x 6-pin power connector simply cannot fit. The RX 480 demands a 450 W suggested PSU, while the Arc A370M carries no such requirement at all.

The percentile rankings reflect this split. The RX 480 sits at the 78th percentile among all GPUs, while the Arc A370M ranks at the 74th. The RX 480's average benchmark score across all tests is 33997, compared to 29175 for the Intel part. These figures place the AMD card about 16.5% higher in average score, but the Arc A370M achieves its results with roughly one-fourth the power draw.

For use cases, the RX 480 wins in desktop gaming, compute tasks, and any scenario where power consumption is not the primary constraint. The Arc A370M wins in portable systems, low-power builds, and applications that benefit from modern API features like DirectX 12 Ultimate and ray tracing support, even if its raw throughput is lower.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 480 records an average benchmark score of 33997, while the Intel Arc A370M averages 29175. The RX 480 also ranks higher at the 78th percentile of all GPUs versus the 74th percentile for the Arc A370M.

Q: How much faster is the RX 480 in Vulkan performance?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 480 scores 45968 against 28673 for the Arc A370M, a 60.3% advantage. This is the largest recorded performance gap between the two cards.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: The Intel Arc A370M includes 8 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The AMD Radeon RX 480 has no ray tracing cores listed and supports DirectX 12 (12_0), which lacks the Ultimate feature set.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The RX 480 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc A370M has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU consumes less power?

A: The Intel Arc A370M has a 35 W TDP, making it far more power-efficient than the AMD Radeon RX 480, which has a 150 W TDP. The Arc A370M is an IGP with no power connectors, while the RX 480 requires a 1x 6-pin connector and a 450 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which GPU is newer?

A: The Intel Arc A370M was released on 2022-03-29, while the AMD Radeon RX 480 launched on 2016-06-28. The Arc A370M also uses a newer 6 nm TSMC process node compared to the RX 480's 14 nm GlobalFoundries node.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains two shared tests, and the AMD Radeon RX 480 wins both. The first is Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 480 scores 37998 and the Arc A370M scores 29676. The 28% delta shows a clear but not overwhelming advantage for the AMD part in OpenCL compute workloads. This test typically reflects general-purpose GPU compute performance across a wide range of operations, and the RX 480's higher shading unit count and wider memory bus contribute to this lead.

The second shared test, Geekbench Vulkan, produces a far more lopsided result. The RX 480 scores 45968, while the Arc A370M manages only 28673. The 60.3% delta is the single biggest performance gap in the entire comparison. Vulkan is a low-overhead graphics API, and the RX 480's 256-bit memory interface with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth appears to provide a substantial advantage in memory-intensive rendering workloads. The Arc A370M's 64-bit bus and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth likely bottleneck its Vulkan performance despite its higher boost clock of 2050 MHz versus 1266 MHz for the RX 480.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this pattern. The RX 480's 33997 average exceeds the Arc A370M's 29175 by about 16.5%. When placed against their nearest rivals, the two GPUs occupy surprisingly similar competitive positions. The RX 480's closest rival is the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB at 34154, a 0.5% gap, with the AMD Radeon RX 7700S at 33849 sitting 0.4% behind. The Arc A370M sits within 1% of the AMD Radeon RX 6800M at 28874, showing that its performance tier is tightly contested in the mobile space.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. Starting with the chip itself, the RX 480 uses the Ellesmere chip built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the Arc A370M uses the DG2-128 chip on TSMC's 6 nm node. The transistor counts differ notably: 5,700 million for AMD versus 7,200 million for Intel, though the Intel die is smaller at 157 mm² compared to 232 mm². This yields a transistor density of 45.9M per mm² for the Arc A370M versus 24.6M per mm² for the RX 480.

Clock speeds favor the Intel part. The Arc A370M runs at a 1550 MHz base clock and 2050 MHz boost, while the RX 480 operates at 1120 MHz base and 1266 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the RX 480 uses 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) GDDR5, while the Arc A370M uses 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) GDDR6. Despite the higher effective memory speed, the Arc A370M's narrower 64-bit bus limits its bandwidth to 112.0 GB/s, less than half the RX 480's 256.0 GB/s.

Memory capacity heavily favors the AMD card: 8 GB versus 4 GB. The RX 480 also has more shading units (2304 versus 1024), more texture mapping units (144 versus 64), and an equal 32 ROPs. The pixel rate favors the Arc A370M at 65.60 GPixel/s versus 40.51 GPixel/s, but the texture rate favors the RX 480 at 182.3 GTexel/s versus 131.2 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 5.834 TFLOPS for AMD versus 4.198 TFLOPS for Intel.

Power and physical specs diverge sharply. The RX 480 draws 150 W and requires a 450 W PSU, while the Arc A370M draws only 35 W. The RX 480 is a dual-slot card measuring 240 mm in length, while the Arc A370M is an IGP with no standalone dimensions, power connectors, or PSU requirement. The RX 480 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Arc A370M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs also differ: the RX 480 offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Arc A370M's outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs spans six years of hardware evolution. The RX 480 uses AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture, part of the Arctic Islands generation (RX 400 series), while the Arc A370M uses Intel's Xe-HPG architecture from the Alchemist generation (Arc 3 Mobile). The RX 480's predecessor is listed as Pirate Islands and its successor as Polaris, whereas the Arc A370M has no listed predecessor or successor.

The process technology difference is stark: 14 nm GlobalFoundries for AMD versus 6 nm TSMC for Intel. The Arc A370M achieves a transistor density of 45.9M per mm², nearly double the RX 480's 24.6M per mm², despite having more total transistors (7,200 million versus 5,700 million). This density advantage enables the Arc A370M to deliver modern features in a fraction of the power envelope.

API support reveals the generational divide. The Arc A370M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), the latest feature level, while the RX 480 supports DirectX 12 (12_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan, but the Arc A370M supports Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.3 for the RX 480. The Arc A370M includes 8 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the RX 480. FP16 performance also differs: the RX 480 delivers 5.834 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the Arc A370M delivers 8.397 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), showing Intel's design emphasis on variable-precision workloads.

The memory architecture reflects different design philosophies. The RX 480 pairs 8 GB of GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus for high bandwidth, while the Arc A370M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, prioritizing capacity efficiency over raw bandwidth. The Arc A370M's higher boost clock of 2050 MHz partially compensates for its narrower bus, but the recorded benchmark data shows it cannot overcome the RX 480's bandwidth advantage in practice.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The AMD Radeon RX 480 is the faster GPU in every shared benchmark, winning both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan by 28% and 60.3% respectively. Its average benchmark score of 33997 outpaces the Arc A370M's 29175 by roughly 16.5%, and it ranks four percentile points higher among all GPUs. For users who prioritize raw compute and graphics throughput above all else, the RX 480 is the obvious choice from the measured data.

However, the Arc A370M's profile tells a different story. Its 35 W TDP, IGP form factor, and lack of any power connector requirement make it the only option for ultra-portable systems. The RX 480 demands a dual-slot chassis, a 1x 6-pin power connector, and a 450 W PSU, which rules it out for any thin-and-light application. The Arc A370M also brings modern architecture features: DirectX 12 Ultimate, 8 ray tracing cores, Vulkan 1.4 support, and a 6 nm TSMC process with a transistor density of 45.9M per mm².

The choice between these two GPUs depends entirely on the use case. Desktop builders with adequate power delivery and chassis space should select the RX 480 for its 60.3% Vulkan advantage and larger 8 GB memory pool. Mobile users and compact system builders should select the Arc A370M for its 35 W power draw and modern feature set, accepting the lower benchmark scores as the trade-off for portability and efficiency. The RX 480 is also end-of-life with a 2016 release date, while the Arc A370M is a 2022 product, though both are listed as end-of-life in the database.