AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP vs Intel Arc A750 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP compare to the Intel Arc A750 in the database's average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP has an average benchmark score of 23061, while the Intel Arc A750 scores 20582. The RX 580 2048SP sits 0.2% ahead of the Intel Arc B580, while the Arc A750 is 0.1% ahead of the Arc B570 in its own rival group.

Q: Which GPU achieves the higher score in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12?

A: The Intel Arc A750 wins decisively with a score of 2612 versus 849 for the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP, a delta of -67.5% from the AMD card's perspective.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two cards?

A: The Intel Arc A750 provides 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, while the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP offers 224.0 GB/s with 4 GB of GDDR5 on the same 256-bit bus width.

Q: How do their compute-oriented Geekbench scores compare?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the Intel Arc A750 scores 98554 versus 29668 for the RX 580 2048SP, a 69.9% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Arc A750 scores 85631 versus 38666, a 54.8% lead.

Q: Which card has the higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Intel Arc A750 reaches 268.8 GPixel/s, far above the 41.09 GPixel/s of the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP. This is consistent with the Arc card's 112 ROPs versus 32 ROPs on the AMD card.

Q: What are the production statuses of these two GPUs?

A: Both are listed as end-of-life products. The AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP was released on 2018-10-14, and the Intel Arc A750 was released on 2022-10-11.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP uses the Polaris 20 chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Intel Arc A750 uses the DG2-512 chip built on Xe-HPG architecture, manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC. This process difference is substantial: the Intel chip packs 21,700 million transistors into a 406 mm² die, producing a transistor density of 53.4M per mm². The AMD chip contains 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, for a density of 24.6M per mm².

The compute configurations diverge sharply. The RX 580 2048SP has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Arc A750 has 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. The Intel card also includes 28 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the AMD card. Neither card lists tensor cores in the database.

Clock behavior differs as well. The AMD card runs at a base clock of 1168 MHz and a boost clock of 1284 MHz. The Intel card runs at a base of 2050 MHz and a boost of 2400 MHz. Memory clocks also differ: the AMD card uses 1750 MHz with 7 Gbps effective, while the Intel card uses 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective.

The FP32 throughput tells a clear story: the Arc A750 delivers 17.20 TFLOPS versus 5.259 TFLOPS for the RX 580 2048SP. The FP16 numbers are even more lopsided, with Intel at 34.41 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) versus AMD's 5.259 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). Texture rate follows the same pattern, 537.6 GTexel/s for Intel versus 164.4 GTexel/s for AMD.

API support differs in the DirectX tier. The RX 580 2048SP supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the Arc A750 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the Vulkan versions differ: AMD lists Vulkan 1.3, Intel lists Vulkan 1.4.

The power and interface specifications also separate these cards. The AMD card has a TDP of 150 W with a suggested PSU of 450 W and a single 8-pin connector. The Intel card has a TDP of 225 W, a suggested PSU of 550 W, and requires a 6-pin plus an 8-pin connector. The AMD card uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Intel card uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs differ: the RX 580 2048SP offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Arc A750 offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 2.0.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records three head-to-head comparisons between these two cards, and the Intel Arc A750 wins all three. The largest margin appears in Geekbench OpenCL, where the Arc A750 scores 98554 against 29668 for the RX 580 2048SP. That is a delta of -69.9% when measured from the AMD card's perspective, meaning the AMD card trails by roughly two-thirds of its own score. This is a compute workload, and the Intel card's advantage in shading units, clock speed, and FP32 throughput all contribute.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the margin narrows somewhat but remains lopsided. The Arc A750 scores 85631, and the RX 580 2048SP scores 38666, a delta of -54.8%. The AMD card actually performs relatively better in Vulkan than in OpenCL, but it still trails by more than half. This suggests the AMD architecture handles Vulkan more efficiently relative to its own capabilities, but the raw hardware gap remains too large to overcome.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test shows the third win for Intel. The Arc A750 scores 2612 versus 849 for the RX 580 2048SP, a delta of -67.5%. This is a modern DX12 workload, and the Arc A750's DirectX 12 Ultimate support and 28 ray tracing cores likely play a role, though the database does not separate those effects.

Across all three tests, the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP records zero wins, and the Intel Arc A750 records three. The average benchmark scores in the database tell a slightly different overall story, however. The RX 580 2048SP has an average of 23061, which is higher than the Arc A750's 20582. This is because the AMD card's average includes only three benchmark entries, while the Intel card's average includes ten entries, some of which are older DirectX and compute tests where the card scores lower. The head-to-head tests are the more direct comparison, and they uniformly favor Intel.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification category in the database.

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP | Intel Arc A750 |

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

| Chip | Polaris 20 | DG2-512 |

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Xe-HPG |

| Process node | 14 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 5,700 million | 21,700 million |

| Die size | 232 mm² | 406 mm² |

| Transistor density | 24.6M / mm² | 53.4M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1168 MHz | 2050 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1284 MHz | 2400 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1750 MHz, 7 Gbps effective | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 2048 | 3584 |

| TMUs | 128 | 224 |

| ROPs | 32 | 112 |

| RT cores | None | 28 |

| Pixel rate | 41.09 GPixel/s | 268.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 164.4 GTexel/s | 537.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.259 TFLOPS | 17.20 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 5.259 TFLOPS (1:1) | 34.41 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 150 W | 225 W |

| Power connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 550 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

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

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Display outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0 |

| Release date | 2018-10-14 | 2022-10-11 |

| Predecessor | Arctic Islands | Xe Graphics |

| Successor | Vega | Battlemage |

The only specification where the AMD card does not trail is TDP, where it draws 150 W versus 225 W for Intel. The AMD card also has a shorter physical length at 241 mm, while the Intel card's length is not recorded in the database. Both cards are dual-slot designs.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A750 wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark. In Geekbench OpenCL, its 98554 score is 69.9% ahead of the RX 580 2048SP. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, its 2612 score is 67.5% ahead. In Geekbench Vulkan, its 85631 score is 54.8% ahead. The Arc A750 is the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads, modern DX12 titles, and any application that can use Vulkan. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth also gives it a substantial advantage in memory-bound scenarios.

The AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP does not win any benchmark in the head-to-head set, but the database's average score tells a more nuanced story. Its average benchmark score of 23061 is higher than the Arc A750's 20582, and it sits just 0.2% behind the Intel Arc B580 in its nearest rival group. This suggests that in the specific set of tests that contribute to its average, the AMD card performs competitively. Its 150 W TDP and 450 W suggested PSU make it a lighter power draw option, and its 1x DVI output may matter for users with legacy displays. Its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface is older, but it remains functional.

For users who prioritize power efficiency and legacy connectivity, the RX 580 2048SP has a role. For users who prioritize raw performance in modern workloads, the Arc A750 is the stronger option by a wide margin.

The Verdict

The Intel Arc A750 is the superior performer in the recorded head-to-head benchmarks. It wins all three tests, with margins ranging from 54.8% to 69.9%. Its architecture is newer, its transistor count is nearly four times higher, its memory bandwidth is more than double, and its FP32 throughput is over three times higher. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and includes 28 ray tracing cores. Users who play modern games, run compute workloads, or want 8 GB of VRAM should choose the Intel Arc A750. The database records its launch MSRP as 289 USD.

The AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP is an older design that nevertheless posts a higher average benchmark score in the database, driven by its three strong entries. It draws 75 W less power, requires a smaller PSU, and offers a DVI output that the Intel card lacks. Users on legacy systems, those with strict power budgets, or those who need DVI connectivity may find the AMD card sufficient. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth are limiting factors in modern scenarios, and its lack of ray tracing support removes it from consideration for that feature.

The data is unambiguous in direct comparison: the Intel Arc A750 wins every head-to-head test, and the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP wins none. The Intel card is the pick for performance, while the AMD card is the pick for lower power draw and legacy display support. Both are end-of-life products, so availability and platform compatibility should drive the final decision.