AMD Radeon RX 560 XT vs Intel Arc Pro A30M Comparison

# AMD Radeon RX 560 XT vs Intel Arc Pro A30M

The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT and Intel Arc Pro A30M are both end-of-life graphics solutions, but they target fundamentally different segments. The RX 560 XT is a 150 W desktop card from the Polaris generation, built on a 14 nm process, while the Arc Pro A30M is a 50 W mobile-focused part using Intel's Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm node. Based on the available benchmark data, the Intel Arc Pro A30M holds a slim lead in the only shared test, but the two cards are separated by more than just raw compute — power draw, bus interface, and feature support tell the real story.

The Verdict

The data shows a near-dead heat in raw OpenCL performance. The Intel Arc Pro A30M scores 31,894 in Geekbench OpenCL, edging out the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT's 31,387 by just 1.6%. That is a statistically negligible margin — in real-world terms, these two GPUs are essentially equivalent in this workload. However, the context around that score could not be more different. The RX 560 XT draws 150 W and requires a 450 W power supply with a 6-pin connector; the Arc Pro A30M draws 50 W and needs no external power connector at all. For a system builder prioritizing efficiency, the Intel part is the clear choice — it delivers roughly the same compute throughput at one-third the power envelope.

The AMD card sits at the 79th percentile among all GPUs, while the Intel card sits at the 76th. The RX 560 XT's average benchmark score of 34,133 places it within 0.1% of the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB (34,154) and 0.2% of the RTX A1000 (34,207). The Arc Pro A30M's average of 31,894 puts it 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA TITAN RTX (31,676) and 1.1% ahead of the RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (31,532). Neither card is a slouch in its respective context, but the AMD part has slightly better overall standing relative to the broader GPU landscape.

Choose the RX 560 XT if you need a desktop card with a full-height PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, a 256-bit memory bus, and dual-slot cooling — and you have the power budget to feed it. Choose the Arc Pro A30M if you need a compact, low-power mobile solution with PCIe 4.0 x8 connectivity, hardware ray tracing, and modern API support like DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4. The data does not support declaring either a definitive winner; it supports picking the right tool for the right chassis.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT wins on memory bandwidth and raw shading throughput. Its 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth, delivered over a 256-bit GDDR5 bus, is 75% higher than the Arc Pro A30M's 128.0 GB/s over a 64-bit GDDR6 bus. The RX 560 XT also fields 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, giving it a texture rate of 137.3 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 39.23 GPixel/s. The Arc Pro A30M counters with 1,024 shading units and 64 TMUs, producing 128.0 GTexel/s — about 6.8% lower — but a much higher pixel rate of 64.00 GPixel/s, which is 63% higher than the AMD card. The Arc Pro also has 8 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature the RX 560 XT lacks entirely.

In FP32 compute, the AMD card produces 4.394 TFLOPS versus 4.096 TFLOPS for the Intel part — a 7.3% advantage for the RX 560 XT. But the Arc Pro A30M doubles its FP32 throughput in FP16, reaching 8.192 TFLOPS, while the RX 560 XT is capped at 4.394 TFLOPS in FP16 (1:1 ratio). Any workload that leverages FP16 math will be dramatically faster on the Intel card. The Intel part also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, versus the RX 560 XT's DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3 — meaning the Arc Pro A30M is ready for newer rendering features and API extensions.

The RX 560 XT wins on display outputs, offering 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Arc Pro A30M's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent" — a clear sign this is a mobile part with no fixed display configuration. The AMD card also has a defined physical footprint: 241 mm (9.5 inches) long, dual-slot. The Intel part has no listed dimensions, reinforcing its role as an embedded or laptop GPU.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT is built on the Ellesmere chip using GCN 4.0 architecture, part of the Polaris (RX 500) generation. It uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, packs 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 24.6 million per square millimeter. The Arc Pro A30M uses the DG2-128 chip with Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist (Pro-Series Mobile) generation. It is fabbed on a 6 nm process by TSMC, with 7,200 million transistors on a smaller 157 mm² die, yielding a much higher density of 45.9 million per square millimeter. The Intel chip is physically smaller but more densely packed — a hallmark of the newer process node.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The RX 560 XT runs at a base of 1074 MHz and a boost of 1226 MHz. The Arc Pro A30M runs at 1500 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost — 39.6% higher base and 63.1% higher boost. This explains how the Intel part keeps pace in compute despite having fewer shading units: it is running at significantly higher clocks. Memory clocks also favor Intel: 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) for the AMD card. The AMD card compensates with a 256-bit bus versus 64-bit, resulting in its superior bandwidth.

Power delivery is the starkest architectural difference. The RX 560 XT has a 150 W TDP, a dual-slot cooler, a single 6-pin power connector, and requires a 450 W suggested PSU. The Arc Pro A30M has a 50 W TDP, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU rating — it is designed to be powered entirely through its slot or soldered to a board. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 3.0 x16 for AMD, PCIe 4.0 x8 for Intel. The newer PCIe 4.0 standard offers more bandwidth per lane, so the x8 link is not necessarily a disadvantage.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A30M scores 31,894 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 1.6% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT's 31,387. This is a very narrow margin and effectively a tie in practical terms.

Q: Can the AMD card do ray tracing?

A: No. The RX 560 XT has no ray tracing cores listed in its specifications. The Intel Arc Pro A30M includes 8 RT cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

Q: Which card has better memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT has 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth over a 256-bit GDDR5 bus. The Intel Arc Pro A30M has 128.0 GB/s over a 64-bit GDDR6 bus. The AMD card offers 75% more bandwidth.

Q: Does the Intel card require a power supply upgrade?

A: The Arc Pro A30M has a 50 W TDP and no power connectors, with no suggested PSU listed. The RX 560 XT requires a 150 W TDP, a 6-pin connector, and a 450 W suggested PSU. The Intel part is far easier to power.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A30M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD RX 560 XT supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Intel's part is more future-proof for API-level features.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life. The RX 560 XT was released on 2019-03-12, while the Arc Pro A30M was released on 2022-08-07.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, where the Intel Arc Pro A30M wins with a score of 31,894 against the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT's 31,387. That is a delta of -1.6% for the AMD card, meaning Intel is ahead by 1.6%. In absolute terms, the difference is just 507 points — a rounding error in most GPU benchmarks. This single result tells us the two cards are in the same performance class for general compute workloads.

But the wider benchmark picture adds nuance. The RX 560 XT also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 36,879, which is not available for the Arc Pro A30M. That Vulkan score is 17.5% higher than its own OpenCL score, suggesting the AMD card scales well with modern APIs. The Arc Pro A30M's average benchmark score of 31,894 is identical to its OpenCL score, since no other tests were recorded. The RX 560 XT's average of 34,133 is pulled up by its Vulkan result, giving it a 7.0% higher average than the Intel part.

Looking at nearest rivals, the RX 560 XT's average sits between the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB (34,154, -0.1% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 480 (33,997, +0.4% delta). The Arc Pro A30M's average sits between the AMD Radeon Pro 570X (32,176, -0.9% delta) and the AMD FirePro S10000 (32,388, -1.5% delta). Notably, the Arc Pro A30M is 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA TITAN RTX (31,676) and 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (31,532). The RX 560 XT is 0.2% behind the NVIDIA RTX A1000 (34,207) but 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 7950 (33,951). In relative standing, the AMD card is slightly better positioned among its peers, but both are mid-pack performers.

The wins tally is clear: the Intel Arc Pro A30M wins 1 benchmark, the AMD card wins 0. But with only one shared test, that tally is not conclusive. The Vulkan result for the RX 560 XT — 36,879 — suggests the AMD card may pull ahead in Vulkan-optimized workloads, but no direct comparison exists in the data. The practical takeaway is that these are closely matched in compute, with the Intel part offering modern features and dramatically lower power draw.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification category. The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT uses the Ellesmere chip on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die. The Intel Arc Pro A30M uses DG2-128 on a 6 nm TSMC process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. Clock speeds: AMD runs at 1074 MHz base and 1226 MHz boost; Intel runs at 1500 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost. Memory: AMD has 4 GB GDDR5 at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) on a 256-bit bus for 224.0 GB/s; Intel has 4 GB GDDR6 at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) on a 64-bit bus for 128.0 GB/s.

Compute resources: AMD has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs; Intel has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The AMD card has no RT cores; Intel has 8. Pixel rate: 39.23 GPixel/s for AMD versus 64.00 GPixel/s for Intel. Texture rate: 137.3 GTexel/s for AMD versus 128.0 GTexel/s for Intel. FP32: 4.394 TFLOPS for AMD versus 4.096 TFLOPS for Intel. FP16: 4.394 TFLOPS (1:1) for AMD versus 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) for Intel.

Power and physical: AMD has a 150 W TDP, dual-slot cooler, 1x 6-pin connector, and 450 W suggested PSU. Intel has a 50 W TDP, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x16; Intel uses PCIe 4.0 x8. AMD has 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs; Intel's outputs are portable-device dependent. AMD is 241 mm (9.5 inches) long; Intel has no listed dimensions. API support: AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3; Intel supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.