AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary vs Intel Arc A370M Comparison

The Intel Arc A370M and AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary occupy different corners of the GPU landscape, but the benchmark data reveals a stark performance hierarchy. While the Arc A370M is a mobile-first part with an average benchmark score of 29,175, the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary is a desktop powerhouse averaging 26,553 across a broader test suite. The head-to-head results are unambiguous: the AMD card wins both shared tests by a wide margin, yet the Intel part holds a higher percentile ranking (74th vs. 72nd), hinting that the story is more nuanced than raw compute alone.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data shows a decisive AMD victory in the two directly comparable tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary scores 77,161 against the Arc A370M’s 29,676, a delta of -61.5% for the Intel part. The Vulkan test tells a similar tale: AMD scores 74,281 versus Intel’s 28,673, a -61.4% gap. These are not marginal differences; the AMD card is delivering roughly 2.6 times the raw performance in both APIs. This suggests the RX 5700 XT’s larger memory bus and higher shading unit count translate directly into massive throughput advantages in compute-heavy workloads.

However, the Arc A370M’s average benchmark score of 29,175 is actually higher than the RX 5700 XT’s 26,553. This apparent contradiction stems from the test sets. The Intel card only has two Geekbench entries, both of which are strong for its class. The AMD card includes PassMark tests where it scores lower (e.g., 98 in DirectX 10, 66 in DirectX 12), which drags down its average. The Arc’s nearest rivals—the RX Vega M GH at 29,197 and FirePro W8000 at 29,211—are within 0.1% of its score, indicating it sits in a tight competitive cluster. Meanwhile, the RX 5700 XT’s nearest rival, the RTX A4000, is only 0.5% ahead, showing it punches well above its weight in this mixed bag.

The wins tally is telling: AMD takes both head-to-head tests, while Intel secures zero. Yet the percentile data complicates things—the Arc A370M ranks in the 74th percentile of all GPUs, beating the RX 5700 XT’s 72nd percentile. This implies that the Intel part’s efficiency and targeted mobile performance place it higher in the overall distribution, even though it loses decisively in raw speed. The data invites a question: is the Arc A370M a better relative performer in its niche, or is the percentile metric skewed by the sparse benchmark set?

Architecture Differences

The architecture gap is fundamental. The Arc A370M uses Intel’s Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process, packing 7,200 million transistors into a 157 mm² die. The RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary employs AMD’s RDNA 1.0 on a 7 nm node, with 10,300 million transistors across a larger 251 mm² die. The transistor density tells a story of process maturity: Intel achieves 45.9M transistors per mm², while AMD manages 41.0M/mm²—the smaller node gives Intel a density edge, but AMD compensates with a much larger physical footprint.

Core counts diverge sharply. The Arc A370M has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, alongside 8 dedicated ray tracing cores. The RX 5700 XT counters with 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, but has no ray tracing hardware at all. This makes the Intel part architecturally modern with RT support, while the AMD card relies on brute-force rasterization. The FP32 throughput reflects this: the RX 5700 XT delivers 10.14 TFLOPS versus the Arc’s 4.198 TFLOPS—a 2.4x advantage that aligns with the benchmark deltas.

Memory systems are equally disparate. The Arc A370M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 5700 XT offers 8 GB on a 256-bit bus, quadrupling bandwidth to 448.0 GB/s. This explains why the AMD card excels in memory-intensive tasks—it has both more capacity and 4x the data throughput. Clock speeds are closer: the Arc boosts to 2050 MHz, while the AMD card hits 1980 MHz, but the AMD part’s higher base clock (1680 MHz vs. 1550 MHz) and game clock (1830 MHz) suggest better sustained performance under load.

Feature support also differs. The Arc A370M lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the RX 5700 XT only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the Intel card’s newer API level could matter for future titles. Power consumption is a chasm: the Arc draws 35 W and is an IGP (integrated graphics package), while the RX 5700 XT consumes 225 W and requires dual-slot cooling plus a 6-pin and 8-pin power connector. The AMD card’s suggested PSU is 550 W, versus none for the Intel part—a sign of their entirely different deployment scenarios.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary wins outright in any scenario demanding raw compute or memory bandwidth. Its 2,560 shading units and 448 GB/s bandwidth make it a clear choice for 1440p or 4K gaming, content creation, or GPU-accelerated rendering. The OpenCL score of 77,161 and Vulkan score of 74,281 indicate it can handle heavy parallel workloads—think video encoding, 3D modeling, or scientific computing—without breaking a sweat. The PassMark G3D score of 16,437 further confirms its rasterization strength, despite weaker DirectX 10 and 12 scores (98 and 66) that suggest driver overhead or API inefficiencies.

The Arc A370M, conversely, wins on efficiency and integration. Its 35 W TDP means it can be deployed in thin-and-light laptops without active cooling, a category the 225 W RX 5700 XT cannot touch. The ray tracing cores provide hardware-accelerated RT effects, which the AMD card lacks entirely. For users prioritizing portability and modern API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate), the Arc A370M is the only viable option of the two. Its Geekbench scores—29,676 OpenCL and 28,673 Vulkan—are respectable for an integrated part, placing it in the 74th percentile of all GPUs.

The percentile data reinforces this split. The Arc A370M outperforms the RX 5700 XT in percentile ranking (74 vs. 72), suggesting that relative to the broader GPU population, it sits higher than its raw scores imply. This is likely because the average benchmark score includes the AMD card’s weaker PassMark results, which pull it down. For a mobile user, the Arc A370M is a top-tier integrated solution; for a desktop user, the RX 5700 XT is a mid-range discrete card that dominates in absolute terms.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A370M has an average benchmark score of 29,175, while the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary averages 26,553, despite losing both head-to-head tests.

Q: How much faster is the AMD card in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RX 5700 XT scores 77,161 versus the Arc A370M’s 29,676, a delta of -61.5% for the Intel part, meaning the AMD card is roughly 2.6x faster.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A370M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Arc A370M includes 8 ray tracing cores, while the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary has no ray tracing hardware listed in its specifications.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RX 5700 XT offers 448.0 GB/s across a 256-bit bus, while the Arc A370M provides 112.0 GB/s on a 64-bit bus—a 4x difference in favor of AMD.

Q: Which GPU ranks higher in the overall percentile?

A: The Arc A370M is in the 74th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 5700 XT is in the 72nd percentile, indicating the Intel part performs better relative to its peers.

Q: What are the power consumption figures?

A: The Arc A370M has a 35 W TDP, while the RX 5700 XT has a 225 W TDP, requiring a 550 W suggested PSU versus none for the Intel card.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Arc A370M | AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary |

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

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | RDNA 1.0 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 10,300 million |

| Die Size | 157 mm² | 251 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1550 MHz | 1680 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2050 MHz | 1980 MHz |

| Game Clock | N/A | 1830 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Bus | 64 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 64 | 160 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 8 | None |

| FP32 Performance | 4.198 TFLOPS | 10.14 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 8.397 TFLOPS | 20.28 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 35 W | 225 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

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

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Dimensions | N/A | 272 mm x 111 mm x 40 mm |

| Release Date | 2022-03-29 | 2019-07-06 |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | 449 USD |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear bifurcation. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary is the performance winner, taking both head-to-head benchmarks with deltas exceeding 61%, and offering 2.4x the FP32 throughput (10.14 TFLOPS vs. 4.198 TFLOPS) alongside 4x the memory bandwidth (448.0 GB/s vs. 112.0 GB/s). It is the only choice for users who need maximum compute in a desktop environment, provided they can accommodate its 225 W TDP, dual-slot cooler, and 550 W PSU requirement. Its 8 GB VRAM and 256-bit bus make it suitable for high-resolution textures and large datasets.

The Intel Arc A370M, however, is the pragmatic pick for mobile or low-power systems. Its 35 W TDP and IGP form factor mean it can run in devices where a discrete 225 W card is physically impossible. The ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support give it a feature-set advantage for future titles, and its 74th percentile ranking shows it competes well among integrated parts. The 4 GB memory and 64-bit bus limit its ceiling, but for a laptop GPU, the Arc A370M’s scores are respectable.

The verdict hinges on use case. If raw performance is non-negotiable, the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary is the undisputed winner—no two ways about it. If efficiency, portability, and modern API support matter more than brute force, the Arc A370M is the only viable option of the pair. The data does not support a single “best” card; it supports two different answers for two different questions.