AMD Radeon RX 590 vs Intel Arc A370M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data places the Intel Arc A370M and AMD Radeon RX 590 in different performance tiers, though their overall standings in the database are closer than the raw specifications might suggest. The Intel Arc A370M holds a 74th percentile ranking among all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon RX 590 sits at the 70th percentile. This five-point gap in percentile placement is modest, but the average benchmark scores tell a more decisive story.

The Intel Arc A370M achieves an average benchmark score of 29,175 across its recorded tests. The AMD Radeon RX 590, by contrast, averages 24,744. This translates to a difference of 4,431 points, or roughly 17.9% in favor of the Intel part. The gap is substantial, yet the nearest rival data for both cards reveals how each sits within its own competitive cluster.

For the Intel Arc A370M, the closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH with an average score of 29,197, a delta of -0.1%. The AMD FirePro W8000 trails by the same margin at 29,211. The AMD Radeon RX 470 comes in at 28,996, putting the Arc A370M 0.6% ahead. Interestingly, the AMD Radeon RX 6800M, a much higher-tier part, averages 28,874, meaning the Arc A370M leads it by 1%. This suggests the Intel mobile GPU punches above its class in the database's aggregate measurements.

The AMD Radeon RX 590's nearest rivals show a different competitive landscape. The NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile averages 24,763, a -0.1% delta relative to the RX 590. The Intel Arc A350M scores 24,647, putting the RX 590 0.4% ahead. The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT averages 24,442, a 1.2% deficit, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 trails by 1.9% at 24,277. The RX 590 thus leads its immediate rivals, but all of them sit well below the Arc A370M's average.

Looking at individual benchmark entries, the Intel Arc A370M records a Geekbench OpenCL score of 29,676 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 28,673. The AMD Radeon RX 590 records a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,081 and a Geekbench Metal score of 48,407. These tests are not directly comparable due to different APIs and workloads, but the aggregate data consistently favors the Intel part. The Arc A370M's average of 29,175 is built on only two test entries, while the RX 590's 24,744 average comes from two very different workloads, one of which (Metal) is heavily platform-specific.

The percentile rankings reinforce the aggregate picture. A 74th percentile placement for the Arc A370M places it above the majority of GPUs in the database, whereas the RX 590's 70th percentile is respectable but lower. Neither card is near the top tier, but the Intel part occupies a higher relative standing.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A370M wins on aggregate performance by a clear margin. Its average benchmark score of 29,175 versus the RX 590's 24,744 represents a 17.9% advantage. This holds across the board when examining the nearest rival deltas: the Arc A370M's closest competitor (RX Vega M GH) is essentially tied at -0.1%, while the RX 590's closest competitor (RTX A5000 Mobile) is also at -0.1%. Both cards lead their immediate rivals, but the Arc A370M operates in a higher scoring bracket.

The Arc A370M also excels in modern API support. It lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the RX 590 lists DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. The newer DirectX feature level and higher Vulkan version give the Intel part an advantage for current-generation titles and forward-looking workloads. The Arc A370M also includes 8 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the RX 590's specification sheet.

The AMD Radeon RX 590 wins in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 performance of 7.119 TFLOPS is significantly higher than the Arc A370M's 4.198 TFLOPS, a 69.6% advantage. Texture fill rate also favors the RX 590 at 222.5 GTexel/s versus 131.2 GTexel/s, a 69.6% lead. The RX 590 has 2304 shading units and 144 texture mapping units, compared to 1024 shading units and 64 TMUs on the Arc A370M. These figures indicate that in pure rasterization throughput, the older AMD card holds a substantial edge.

Memory bandwidth is another clear win for the RX 590. Its 256-bit bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth dwarf the Arc A370M's 64-bit bus and 112.0 GB/s. The RX 590 also has 8 GB of memory versus 4 GB, which matters for texture-heavy workloads at higher resolutions. Pixel rate is the one memory-related metric where the Arc A370M leads: 65.60 GPixel/s versus 49.44 GPixel/s, a 32.7% advantage driven by its higher boost clock.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A370M averages 29,175 across its recorded benchmarks, while the AMD Radeon RX 590 averages 24,744. This gives the Intel part a 17.9% advantage.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon RX 590 have more memory bandwidth?

A: Yes. The RX 590 provides 256.0 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, compared to the Arc A370M's 112.0 GB/s over a 64-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: Only the Intel Arc A370M. It includes 8 ray tracing cores, while the AMD Radeon RX 590 has no ray tracing hardware listed.

Q: How do the two compare in FP32 floating-point performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 590 delivers 7.119 TFLOPS, which is 69.6% higher than the Intel Arc A370M's 4.198 TFLOPS.

Q: What are the DirectX version differences?

A: The Intel Arc A370M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the AMD Radeon RX 590 supports DirectX 12 (12_0).

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Intel Arc A370M records 65.60 GPixel/s, which is 32.7% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 590's 49.44 GPixel/s.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The Intel Arc A370M uses a 6 nm process node from TSMC, while the AMD Radeon RX 590 uses a 12 nm node from GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts differ accordingly: the Arc A370M packs 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a density of 45.9M per mm². The RX 590 has 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, with a density of 24.6M per mm².

Clock speeds show the Arc A370M with a base of 1550 MHz and boost of 2050 MHz. The RX 590 runs at 1469 MHz base and 1545 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the Arc A370M uses 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) GDDR6, while the RX 590 uses 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) GDDR5.

Memory configuration is a major differentiator. The Arc A370M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 112.0 GB/s. The RX 590 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s. The RX 590's memory capacity is double, and its bandwidth is 128.6% higher.

Compute unit counts diverge significantly. The Arc A370M has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RX 590 has 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RX 590 thus has 125% more shading units and 125% more TMUs, while ROP count is identical.

Power and physical specifications show the Arc A370M as a 35 W integrated-class part (IGP slot width) with no power connectors listed. The RX 590 is a 175 W dual-slot card requiring a single 8-pin connector and a 450 W suggested PSU. The RX 590 measures 241 mm (9.5 inches) in length.

Bus interfaces differ: the Arc A370M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RX 590 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent" for the Arc A370M, whereas the RX 590 has 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc A370M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, and belongs to the Alchemist generation (Arc 3 Mobile). The AMD Radeon RX 590 uses the GCN 4.0 architecture on the Polaris 30 chip, part of the Polaris (RX 500) generation. These are fundamentally different designs with different priorities.

The Xe-HPG architecture in the Arc A370M includes dedicated ray tracing cores (8 in total) and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2. It also lists Vulkan 1.4 support, which is newer than the RX 590's Vulkan 1.3. The Arc A370M's FP16 performance of 8.397 TFLOPS is double its FP32 rate, indicating a 2:1 ratio for accelerated half-precision workloads. The RX 590's FP16 is identical to its FP32 at 7.119 TFLOPS, a 1:1 ratio.

The GCN 4.0 architecture in the RX 590 is a mature design without ray tracing hardware or tensor cores. It supports DirectX 12 at feature level 12_0, which lacks some of the newer features found in 12_2. The RX 590's predecessor is listed as Arctic Islands and its successor as Vega, placing it at the end of the Polaris lineage.

Process technology differences are stark. The Arc A370M uses TSMC's 6 nm node, while the RX 590 uses GlobalFoundries' 12 nm node. This contributes to the Arc A370M's much higher transistor density (45.9M per mm² versus 24.6M per mm²) despite having fewer total transistors. The Arc A370M achieves this density with a smaller die (157 mm² versus 232 mm²) and fewer transistors (7,200 million versus 5,700 million).

The API support differences reflect architectural priorities. The Arc A370M lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 590 lists DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the Intel part has a more modern DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split between aggregate performance and raw compute specifications. The Intel Arc A370M wins on average benchmark score, percentile ranking, pixel rate, and modern API support. Its 29,175 average score places it 17.9% ahead of the RX 590's 24,744, and its 74th percentile ranking exceeds the RX 590's 70th. The Arc A370M also offers ray tracing, DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and a 32.7% higher pixel fill rate.

The AMD Radeon RX 590 wins on raw throughput metrics. Its FP32 performance of 7.119 TFLOPS is 69.6% higher than the Arc A370M's 4.198 TFLOPS. Texture fill rate follows the same pattern at 222.5 GTexel/s versus 131.2 GTexel/s. Memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s is more than double the Arc A370M's 112.0 GB/s, and the 8 GB capacity doubles the Arc A370M's 4 GB. These figures suggest the RX 590 handles memory-intensive and compute-heavy workloads better.

For users prioritizing benchmark scores, modern features, and efficiency, the Intel Arc A370M is the stronger choice. Its higher average score, ray tracing support, and newer API versions make it more future-proof. The 35 W TDP versus 175 W TDP also indicates dramatically lower power consumption.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput, memory bandwidth, and memory capacity, the AMD Radeon RX 590 retains advantages. Its higher FP32 and texture rates, plus double the memory, suit traditional rasterization workloads. However, the RX 590's lower aggregate benchmark score and older architecture limit its standing in the database.

The database's measurements consistently favor the Intel Arc A370M in overall performance. The RX 590's wins are confined to specific specification categories rather than benchmark outcomes. Buyers seeking the highest average score should choose the Arc A370M; those needing maximum memory bandwidth and compute throughput should consider the RX 590.