AMD Radeon RX 9060 vs Intel Arc A310E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a stark performance gap between the AMD Radeon RX 9060 and the Intel Arc A310E, though direct head-to-head benchmark results are not available in the database. The RX 9060 carries an average benchmark score of 16,014 across its suite of tests, while the Arc A310E has no recorded benchmark scores, leaving its average at 0. This absence of comparative data means the analysis must rely on the individual benchmark results of the RX 9060 and the architectural specifications of the A310E.

The RX 9060 posts a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3,322, which is a modern, demanding test that stresses ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate features. In Geekbench, it delivers 88,183 in OpenCL and 39,476 in Vulkan, showing strong compute throughput under both API paradigms. Passmark results further detail its profile: 17,631 in G3D, 9,919 in GPU compute, 1,002 in G2D, and legacy DirectX scores of 280 (DX9), 182 (DX11), 104 (DX10), and 44 (DX12). The low DX12 Passmark score of 44 contrasts sharply with the high 3DMark result, indicating the Passmark DX12 test may not fully utilize the architecture's modern features.

The Arc A310E, by contrast, offers no comparable numbers in the database. Its percentile rank of 50 places it at the median of all GPUs, while the RX 9060 sits at the 59th percentile. The RX 9060 also holds a clear advantage in raw throughput metrics: its FP32 compute is 21.43 TFLOPS versus 3.072 TFLOPS for the A310E, a difference of roughly 7x. Pixel rate is 191.4 GPixel/s against 32.00 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 334.9 GTexel/s versus 64.00 GTexel/s. These figures indicate that in any workload relying on shader math, rasterization, or texturing, the RX 9060 will outperform the A310E by a wide margin.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9060 has an average benchmark score of 16,014. The Intel Arc A310E has no recorded benchmark scores, so its average is 0.

Q: How do the two compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The RX 9060 provides 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth with an 8 GB GDDR6 memory pool on a 128-bit bus. The Arc A310E provides 124.0 GB/s with 4 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RX 9060 has a TDP of 132 W and requires a 300 W suggested PSU with a single 8-pin connector. The Arc A310E has a TDP of 75 W, a 250 W suggested PSU, and needs no power connectors.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes ray tracing. The RX 9060 has 28 dedicated ray tracing cores, while the Arc A310E has 6.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: The RX 9060 is listed as Active in production. The Arc A310E is End-of-life, with the database noting its successor is Battlemage.

Q: How do their bus interfaces differ?

A: The RX 9060 uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Arc A310E uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The RX 9060 is built on RDNA 4.0, using the Navi 44 chip with the codename Strix Point, part of the Navi IV generation. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, hosting 29,700 million transistors on a 199 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 149.2M per mm². The Arc A310E uses Intel's Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip from the Alchemist generation. It is built on a 6 nm TSMC process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, for a density of 45.9M per mm².

Core configurations diverge significantly. The RX 9060 has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Arc A310E has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 ray tracing cores. The RX 9060 also has a much higher transistor count, which supports its larger compute and memory subsystems.

Clock behavior also differs. The RX 9060 has a base clock of 1700 MHz, a boost clock of 2990 MHz, and a game clock of 2400 MHz. The Arc A310E has a fixed clock of 2000 MHz for both base and boost, with no separate game clock listed. Memory clocks follow suit: the RX 9060 runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, while the A310E runs at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective.

Feature support is similar at the API level, with both cards supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. However, the RX 9060 supports FP32 and FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, both at 21.43 TFLOPS. The Arc A310E has FP32 at 3.072 TFLOPS and FP16 at 6.144 TFLOPS, a 2:1 ratio, indicating a different compute throughput profile for half-precision workloads.

The Verdict

The data indicates the AMD Radeon RX 9060 is the stronger GPU by a substantial margin in nearly every measurable category. Its average benchmark score of 16,014 places it at the 59th percentile of all GPUs, and it compares closely to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, which has an average score of 16,129 and a delta of -0.7% against the RX 9060. The RX 9060 also edges out the AMD Radeon R9 370X (15,862, delta +1%) and the AMD Radeon RX 7700 (15,852, delta +1%). The Arc A310E has no benchmark scores, no nearest rivals, and sits at the 50th percentile, making it difficult to position against the RX 9060 in practical terms.

For users prioritizing raw performance, the RX 9060 is the clear choice. It offers 7x the FP32 compute, 6x the pixel rate, and over 5x the texture rate of the A310E. Its 8 GB memory buffer is double the A310E's 4 GB, and its bandwidth is more than double. The RX 9060 also has a newer process node, active production status, and a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the A310E is end-of-life with PCIe 4.0 x8.

The Arc A310E does have advantages in physical size and power draw. It is a single-slot card with no power connectors, a 75 W TDP, and dimensions of 168 mm by 69 mm by 20 mm. The RX 9060 is dual-slot with a single 8-pin connector and a 132 W TDP. For systems with severe space or power constraints, the A310E may fit where the RX 9060 cannot, but this comes at a massive performance cost.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 9060 | Intel Arc A310E |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 4.0 | Xe-HPG |

| Chip | Navi 44 | DG2-128 |

| Generation | Navi IV (RX 9000) | Alchemist (Arc 3) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 29,700 million | 7,200 million |

| Die Size | 199 mm² | 157 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 149.2M / mm² | 45.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1700 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2990 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Game Clock | 2400 MHz | None |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective | 1937 MHz, 15.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 124.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 768 |

| TMUs | 112 | 32 |

| ROPs | 64 | 16 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 28 | 6 |

| Pixel Rate | 191.4 GPixel/s | 32.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 334.9 GTexel/s | 64.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 21.43 TFLOPS | 3.072 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 21.43 TFLOPS (1:1) | 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 132 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a | 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2025-08-04 | 2024-03-31 |

| Predecessor | Navi III | Xe Graphics |

| Successor | None | Battlemage |

Where Each One Wins

The RX 9060 wins in every performance-oriented category. Its 21.43 TFLOPS FP32 compute handles heavy shader workloads, and the 1:1 FP16 ratio makes it equally capable for half-precision compute tasks. The 288.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 8 GB frame buffer support high-resolution textures and larger datasets, while the 28 ray tracing cores provide dedicated hardware for DirectX 12 Ultimate ray-traced effects. The 59th percentile ranking, along with benchmark scores that rival the RTX 3060 Ti, positions it as a capable mid-range performer for gaming and general GPU compute.

The Arc A310E wins in physical integration and power efficiency. Its 75 W TDP requires no supplemental power connectors, and its single-slot, 168 mm length allows installation in compact or low-profile systems. The 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs support multi-display setups, though the RX 9060's HDMI 2.1b and DisplayPort 2.1a combination covers standard monitor connectivity. The A310E's 250 W suggested PSU also makes it viable in pre-built or office systems with smaller power supplies.

The data shows no scenario where the A310E outperforms the RX 9060 in raw benchmark terms, as it has no recorded scores. For workloads that fit within 4 GB of memory and do not require high compute throughput, the A310E can serve as a basic display or compute card. But for any task that demands modern gaming performance, ray tracing, or substantial compute throughput, the RX 9060 is the only viable option based on the recorded specifications.