AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM vs Intel Arc A580 Comparison

Intel Arc A580 and AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM land nearly on top of each other in aggregate performance, with the Arc A580 posting an average benchmark score of 57,756 against the RX 5600 OEM’s 57,599. That is a 0.3% gap, placing the Intel card just ahead, and both sit at the 89th and 88th percentiles of all GPUs respectively. In the direct head-to-head tests, the Arc A580 wins both: it scores 91,657 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 61,660 for the RX 5600 OEM, a 48.6% lead, and 79,381 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 53,538, a 48.3% lead. The delta is enormous in compute-oriented workloads, yet the aggregate score stays close because the RX 5600 OEM’s two available benchmarks are both OpenCL and Vulkan, while the Arc A580’s average also includes a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 2,229. This means the Intel part is a compute monster relative to the AMD card, but the overall picture suggests that in gaming or mixed-use scenarios, the difference may shrink—though no gaming benchmarks are in the data to confirm that.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparisons available are two Geekbench tests, and Intel wins both by a wide margin. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Arc A580 hits 91,657 against the RX 5600 OEM’s 61,660. That is a 48.6% advantage, which is not a small edge—it is nearly half again as much performance in a raw compute test. The Vulkan result tells the same story: 79,381 for the Arc A580 versus 53,538 for the RX 5600 OEM, a 48.3% gap. Both tests are synthetic and heavily weighted toward shader throughput and API efficiency, so they favor the card with more shading units, higher clocks, and more memory bandwidth. The Arc A580 has 3,072 shading units, a 2000 MHz boost clock, and 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth; the RX 5600 OEM has 2,048 shading units, a 1560 MHz boost clock, and 288.0 GB/s. The Intel card is fundamentally a larger, faster chip in these respects.

However, the aggregate benchmark scores tell a different story. The Arc A580’s average of 57,756 is built from three tests, including the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,229. That DX12 number is low compared to the Geekbench scores, dragging the average down. The RX 5600 OEM’s average of 57,599 comes from just two tests, both Geekbench, so its average is purely a reflection of those compute-heavy runs. In other words, the RX 5600 OEM does not have a single benchmark where it beats the Arc A580, but its lower compute scores are offset by the Arc A580’s weaker DX12 showing. If 3DMark Steel Nomad is representative of modern DX12 gaming, the RX 5600 OEM might actually be competitive in that arena, but there is no direct comparison for that test in the data.

Looking at nearest rivals, the Arc A580 sits 0.2% above the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X (57,661) and 0.3% above the NVIDIA P102-100 (57,601), while trailing the Intel Arc A570M by 0.8% (58,239). The RX 5600 OEM is 0.1% below the Radeon Pro W5500X, 0% off the P102-100, and 1.1% below the Arc A570M. Both cards are clustered within a 1.1% band, meaning neither is a clear performance outlier in the broader market. The Arc A580’s wins are decisive in compute, but its overall standing is nearly identical to the RX 5600 OEM, which suggests that the RX 5600 OEM’s architecture does something right in the tests it does run.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the Intel Arc A580 is the better card for compute-heavy workloads. It beats the RX 5600 OEM by 48.6% in OpenCL and 48.3% in Vulkan, and it has a higher average benchmark score (57,756 versus 57,599) plus a higher percentile ranking (89th versus 88th). If the primary use case is GPGPU tasks, video encoding, or any application that leverages OpenCL or Vulkan compute, the Arc A580 is the obvious choice. It also has more memory—8 GB versus 6 GB—and significantly more bandwidth, which matters for large datasets.

The RX 5600 OEM, however, is not without merit. Its average score is only 0.3% lower than the Arc A580, and it achieves that with a much smaller chip: 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die versus 21,700 million on a 406 mm² die. It also draws less power (125 W TDP versus 175 W) and requires only a 300 W PSU versus 450 W. For builders with older or smaller power supplies, or those who prioritize efficiency, the RX 5600 OEM is a practical pick. But there is no benchmark in the pack where the RX 5600 OEM wins. Its only two tests are losses, and it has no 3DMark result to compare. The verdict leans Intel for raw performance, but the RX 5600 OEM is a credible alternative if power and budget constraints—though not price, which is not listed—are the deciding factors.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The Arc A580 uses Intel’s Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process, with a DG2-512 chip containing 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 53.4M per mm². The RX 5600 OEM uses AMD’s RDNA 1.0 architecture on a 7 nm TSMC process, with a Navi 10 chip containing 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die, for a density of 41.0M per mm². The Intel chip is more than twice as large and packs twice the transistors, which explains its higher compute throughput.

The Arc A580 features dedicated ray tracing cores—24 of them—while the RX 5600 OEM has none. This is a major architectural split: the Intel card can handle hardware-accelerated ray tracing, whereas the AMD card relies on traditional rasterization. The Arc A580 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the RX 5600 OEM is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). That means the Intel card meets the feature set for modern DX12 Ultimate games, including mesh shaders and variable rate shading, while the AMD card does not. Both support Vulkan 1.4 and OpenGL 4.6, so API compatibility is otherwise equal.

Memory architecture also differs. The Arc A580 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 5600 OEM has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, for 288.0 GB/s. The Intel card has a 78% bandwidth advantage, which is critical for high-resolution textures and compute workloads. The RX 5600 OEM’s smaller memory pool and narrower bus are direct consequences of its smaller die and lower power target. The Arc A580’s larger die also allows for more texture mapping units (192 versus 128) and more raster operations units (96 versus 64), giving it higher pixel and texture rates: 192.0 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s versus 99.84 GPixel/s and 199.7 GTexel/s.

Specification Differences

The specification tables show clear divergences in almost every measurable category. The Arc A580 has a base clock of 1700 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz; the RX 5600 OEM has a base clock of 1130 MHz, a boost clock of 1560 MHz, and a game clock of 1375 MHz. The Intel card runs significantly faster out of the box. Memory clocks differ as well: the Arc A580 runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective, while the RX 5600 OEM runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective. Bandwidth is 512.0 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s.

Shading units are 3,072 versus 2,048, TMUs are 192 versus 128, and ROPs are 96 versus 64. The Arc A580 has 24 ray tracing cores; the RX 5600 OEM has none. FP32 performance is 12.29 TFLOPS for the Intel card versus 6.390 TFLOPS for the AMD card, and FP16 is 24.58 TFLOPS versus 12.78 TFLOPS, both at a 2:1 ratio. Power consumption is higher on the Intel side: 175 W TDP versus 125 W TDP, with the Arc A580 requiring two 8-pin connectors and a 450 W PSU, while the RX 5600 OEM uses one 8-pin and a 300 W PSU. Both are dual-slot cards with PCIe 4.0 x16 interfaces.

Display outputs differ: the Arc A580 has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 2.0, while the RX 5600 OEM has 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The Intel card supports newer display standards, which matters for high refresh rate or high resolution monitors. Production status also differs: the Arc A580 is listed as Active, while the RX 5600 OEM is End-of-life. The release dates are 2023-10-09 for the Arc A580 and 2020-01-20 for the RX 5600 OEM, making the Intel card nearly four years newer. Neither card has a listed launch MSRP, so no price comparison is possible from the data.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc A580 is decisively ahead. It scores 91,657 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 61,660 for the RX 5600 OEM, a 48.6% lead, and 79,381 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 53,538, a 48.3% lead.

Q: Is the RX 5600 OEM competitive in any way?

A: Its average benchmark score of 57,599 is only 0.3% below the Arc A580’s 57,756, and it does so with lower power draw (125 W versus 175 W) and a smaller die (251 mm² versus 406 mm²). However, it wins no benchmark in the data.

Q: Does the Arc A580 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it has 24 dedicated ray tracing cores. The RX 5600 OEM has no ray tracing cores at all.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Arc A580 has 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth on a 256-bit bus with 8 GB GDDR6, while the RX 5600 OEM has 288.0 GB/s on a 192-bit bus with 6 GB GDDR6.

Q: Are both cards compatible with the same PCIe standard?

A: Yes, both use PCIe 4.0 x16. The Arc A580 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the RX 5600 OEM supports only DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The RX 5600 OEM has a 125 W TDP and requires a 300 W PSU, versus the Arc A580’s 175 W TDP and 450 W PSU requirement. The AMD card is the lighter power load.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A580 wins in every benchmark category where a direct comparison exists. Its 48.6% OpenCL advantage and 48.3% Vulkan advantage make it the clear pick for compute tasks like rendering, machine learning inference, or any OpenCL/Vulkan-accelerated application. The 24 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support position it for modern games that use ray tracing or DX12 Ultimate features, and the 512.0 GB/s bandwidth plus 8 GB memory handle large textures and datasets better than 6 GB at 288.0 GB/s. Its higher FP32 throughput (12.29 TFLOPS versus 6.390 TFLOPS) and higher pixel/texture rates also favor it in any resolution-heavy workload.

The RX 5600 OEM wins on efficiency and system integration. Its 125 W TDP and single 8-pin connector make it easier to slot into existing builds with modest power supplies—300 W versus 450 W. Its 7 nm process and 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die mean it generates less heat and takes up less physical space, though both cards are dual-slot. It also has a longer track record, having launched in 2020, so driver maturity and availability may be better, though the production status is End-of-life. For a builder prioritizing low power draw, simpler cabling, or a smaller GPU footprint, the RX 5600 OEM is the sensible choice. For anyone who needs maximum compute throughput, modern API support, or ray tracing, the Arc A580 is the only option that delivers.