GPU Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 480 and Intel Arc Pro A30M are decisively different products, with the RX 480 delivering a 19.1% performance advantage in the only directly comparable benchmark, while the Arc Pro A30M counters with a dramatically more modern feature set and vastly superior efficiency. The data shows a clear split: the RX 480 is the raw compute winner, but the Arc Pro A30M is the architectural showcase, and your choice hinges entirely on whether you prioritize legacy compute throughput or contemporary API support and power economy.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole head-to-head data point is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it yields a definitive winner. The AMD Radeon RX 480 scores 37,998, while the Intel Arc Pro A30M scores 31,894. This translates to a 19.1% lead for the RX 480, a substantial margin that indicates a significant raw compute advantage in general-purpose workloads. This is not a marginal victory; it is a decisive gap that places the older AMD card firmly ahead in this specific metric.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the RX 480’s average benchmark score of 33,997 places it in the 78th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 7950 (average score 33,951, a 0.1% difference), the AMD Radeon RX 7700S (average score 33,849, a 0.4% difference), and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB (average score 34,154, a -0.5% difference). The RX 480 is thus tightly clustered with these cards, showing that its performance level is consistent with that group.

The Intel Arc Pro A30M, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 31,894, placing it in the 76th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA TITAN RTX (average score 31,676, a 0.7% difference), the AMD Radeon Pro 570X (average score 32,176, a -0.9% difference), and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (average score 31,532, a 1.1% difference). The Arc Pro A30M is therefore positioned within a similar performance bracket, but its absolute score is notably lower than the RX 480’s. The 19.1% delta in the direct comparison is consistent with the gap between their average scores, reinforcing that the RX 480 is the faster card in compute-heavy tasks.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is vast, reflecting their different release eras and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon RX 480 is built on the GCN 4.0 architecture, using the Ellesmere chip, and is fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Intel Arc Pro A30M, however, uses the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-128 chip, manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC. This process node difference is critical; the 6 nm node allows for a transistor density of 45.9M / mm², compared to the RX 480’s 24.6M / mm², despite the Intel chip having more transistors overall (7,200 million vs 5,700 million) on a smaller die (157 mm² vs 232 mm²).

The memory subsystems are also fundamentally different. The RX 480 features 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Arc Pro A30M offers only 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, with 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth, exactly half the bandwidth of the RX 480. This is a major disadvantage for the Intel card in memory-intensive scenarios, though its newer GDDR6 type operates at a higher effective speed of 16 Gbps versus 8 Gbps for the GDDR5.

Compute unit configurations diverge sharply. The RX 480 packs 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Arc Pro A30M has 1024 shading units and 64 TMUs, but matches the RX 480 with 32 ROPs. Critically, the Arc Pro A30M includes 8 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the RX 480, which has no dedicated RT hardware. The Intel card also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the RX 480 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Clock speeds and power draw tell the efficiency story. The RX 480 has a base clock of 1120 MHz and a boost of 1266 MHz, while the Arc Pro A30M runs at 1500 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost. Despite the higher clocks, the Intel card consumes only 50 W TDP, compared to the RX 480’s 150 W. This is a threefold reduction in power draw, enabled by the newer process node and streamlined architecture.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 480 wins decisively in raw compute performance. Its 19.1% lead in Geekbench OpenCL, coupled with its higher FP32 throughput of 5.834 TFLOPS (versus 4.096 TFLOPS for the Arc Pro A30M), makes it the clear choice for general-purpose compute tasks, legacy applications, and any workload that relies on sheer shading power. The RX 480 also has a massive memory bandwidth advantage at 256.0 GB/s versus 128.0 GB/s, which directly benefits texture-heavy workloads and large dataset processing. Its 8 GB frame buffer is double the Arc Pro A30M’s 4 GB, providing more headroom for high-resolution textures and multi-tasking.

The Intel Arc Pro A30M wins decisively on efficiency and modern features. Its 50 W TDP is one-third of the RX 480’s 150 W, making it dramatically more suitable for mobile or low-power environments. The inclusion of 8 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support means it is future-proofed for contemporary games and applications that leverage hardware ray tracing, a capability the RX 480 simply does not possess. The Arc Pro A30M’s higher clock speeds (2000 MHz boost vs 1266 MHz) and newer GDDR6 memory also indicate better architectural efficiency per clock, even if its total compute output is lower. Its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface doubles the bandwidth of the RX 480’s PCIe 3.0 x16, though the practical impact depends on the system.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance in OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 480 is significantly faster, scoring 37,998 in Geekbench OpenCL compared to the Intel Arc Pro A30M’s 31,894, a 19.1% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro A30M support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, it includes 8 dedicated ray tracing cores, while the AMD Radeon RX 480 has no RT cores and is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) without ray tracing support.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 480 offers 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth from its 256-bit GDDR5 bus, while the Intel Arc Pro A30M provides 128.0 GB/s from a 64-bit GDDR6 bus.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A30M has a TDP of 50 W, while the AMD Radeon RX 480 has a TDP of 150 W, making the Intel card substantially more power-efficient.

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 480 has an average benchmark score of 33,997, putting it in the 78th percentile, whereas the Intel Arc Pro A30M scores 31,894 on average, in the 76th percentile.

Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 480 is fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the Intel Arc Pro A30M uses a 6 nm process at TSMC.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 480 | Intel Arc Pro A30M |

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

| Chip | Ellesmere | DG2-128 |

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Xe-HPG |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 5,700 million | 7,200 million |

| Die Size | 232 mm² | 157 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.6M / mm² | 45.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1120 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1266 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 128.0 GB/s |

| Memory Speed | 8 Gbps effective | 16 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 2304 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 144 | 64 |

| ROPs | 32 | 32 |

| RT Cores | None | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 40.51 GPixel/s | 64.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 182.3 GTexel/s | 128.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.834 TFLOPS | 4.096 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 5.834 TFLOPS (1:1) | 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 150 W | 50 W |

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

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | None |

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

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

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Launch MSRP | 229 USD | None |

| Release Date | 2016-06-28 | 2022-08-07 |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 480 is the superior choice for anyone prioritizing raw compute performance, memory capacity, and bandwidth. Its 19.1% lead in OpenCL, higher FP32 throughput of 5.834 TFLOPS, double the memory (8 GB vs 4 GB), and double the bandwidth (256.0 GB/s vs 128.0 GB/s) make it the stronger card for demanding computational tasks, legacy game support, and high-resolution texture workloads. Its 78th percentile ranking and close alignment with cards like the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB confirm its competitive standing despite its age.

The Intel Arc Pro A30M is the better option for those who value efficiency and modern features over raw speed. Its 50 W TDP is a fraction of the RX 480’s 150 W, making it ideal for compact or mobile systems. The inclusion of 8 ray tracing cores and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 means it is ready for contemporary software that leverages these APIs. However, its 4 GB memory and 128.0 GB/s bandwidth are significant limitations, and its lower compute scores (31,894 average vs 33,997) place it in a lower performance tier.

In summary, the RX 480 wins on performance and memory, while the Arc Pro A30M wins on architecture and power efficiency. There is no overall victor; the correct choice depends entirely on your workload. If you need compute muscle and memory headroom, pick the RX 480. If you need a low-power, ray tracing-capable GPU for modern applications, pick the Arc Pro A30M.