Intel Arc A310 vs Intel Arc A380 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Arc A380 and Intel Arc A310 share the same DG2-128 silicon, but the benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy between the two. Across nine head-to-head comparisons, the A380 claims eight victories, while the A310 manages only a single win. The margins range from a modest 5.8% to a decisive 28%, revealing where the additional hardware resources of the A380 translate into measurable gains.

The largest gap appears in PassMark GPU Compute, where the A380 scores 2762 against the A310's 2157, a 28% advantage. This compute-heavy workload benefits directly from the A380's expanded execution resources. The Geekbench Vulkan test shows a 26.8% delta, with the A380 posting 36736 versus 28964. OpenCL follows closely at 24.9%, with scores of 38224 and 30607 respectively. These API-level benchmarks consistently favor the higher-specified card, suggesting that raw throughput scales predictably with the hardware configuration.

DirectX 12 performance shows a 20.7% lead for the A380, scoring 35 against the A310's 29. DirectX 10 follows with a 19.4% margin (37 vs 31), while DirectX 11 delivers a 15.2% gap (38 vs 33). The older DirectX 9 API shows the smallest difference at 5.8%, with scores of 73 and 69. This pattern indicates that newer, more demanding APIs extract a larger benefit from the A380's additional shading units, texture mapping units, and render output units.

The PassMark G3D score, which aggregates overall 3D graphics performance, gives the A380 a 15.1% advantage at 6252 versus 5433. This aligns with the card's higher pixel rate and texture rate. The A310's sole victory comes in PassMark G2D, a 2D graphics test, where it scores 625 against the A380's 610, a 2.4% margin. This is a narrow win and likely reflects differences in memory configuration or driver behavior rather than a fundamental architectural advantage.

The average benchmark scores place the A380 at 8558, which is 13.3% higher than the A310's 7550. The A380 sits in the 44th percentile of all GPUs, while the A310 ranks in the 40th percentile. In the nearest rival comparison, the A380's closest competitor is the AMD FirePro W5170M with an average score of 8595, a negligible 0.4% gap. The A310's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 250 at 7557, also within 0.1%. This shows that while the two Intel cards differ meaningfully from each other, they occupy similar tiers relative to the broader GPU landscape.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380 is the clear choice for 3D rendering, compute workloads, and modern API-based gaming. Its 15.1% lead in PassMark G3D, combined with 28% and 26.8% advantages in GPU compute and Vulkan respectively, makes it suitable for tasks that stress the full graphics pipeline. The DirectX 12 advantage of 20.7% is particularly relevant for contemporary game titles that leverage the latest rendering features. The card's 4.198 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 131.2 GTexel/s texture rate provide the raw horsepower needed for these workloads.

The A310, despite its lower scores, is not without purpose. Its single win in PassMark G2D (625 vs 610) suggests it handles 2D desktop workloads with at least equal competence. The card's 30 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of power connectors make it far easier to integrate into compact or low-power systems. For users prioritizing minimal physical footprint and thermal output over peak performance, the A310 offers a viable alternative. Its 4 GB memory capacity and 64-bit bus still support basic gaming and multimedia tasks, albeit with lower frame rates in demanding scenarios.

The data indicates that the A380's additional shading units (1024 vs 768), TMUs (64 vs 32), and ROPs (32 vs 16) translate into consistent gains across nearly every benchmark category. The A310's advantage in power efficiency cannot be quantified from the available scores, but the 30 W TDP versus 75 W suggests a substantially lower power draw. For users building small form factor systems where space and cooling are constrained, the A310's reduced dimensions and connector-free design may outweigh its performance deficit.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on Intel's Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, and belong to the Alchemist generation (Arc 3). They share the same 6 nm process node manufactured by TSMC, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The transistor density is identical at 45.9M per mm². Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring feature parity at the API level.

The internal configuration diverges significantly. The A380 packs 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The A310 halves the TMUs to 32 and ROPs to 16, while shading units drop to 768. Ray tracing cores follow the same pattern: the A380 has 8 RT cores, the A310 has 6. These differences directly explain the performance gaps observed in the benchmarks, as each unit contributes to specific pipeline stages.

Clock speeds also differ. The A380 runs at a base clock of 2000 MHz with a boost of 2050 MHz, while the A310 is locked at 1750 MHz for both base and boost. This 250 MHz boost advantage for the A380 further amplifies its hardware lead. Memory clocks are identical at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective), but the memory subsystem differs in capacity and bus width.

The A380's pixel rate of 65.60 GPixel/s is more than double the A310's 28.00 GPixel/s, a consequence of the doubled ROP count and higher clock. Texture rate follows a similar trajectory: 131.2 GTexel/s versus 56.00 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput stands at 4.198 TFLOPS for the A380 compared to 2.688 TFLOPS for the A310, a 56% difference. FP16 performance scales proportionally at 8.397 TFLOPS and 5.376 TFLOPS respectively, both using a 2:1 ratio.

Specification Differences

The most obvious difference is memory. The A380 ships with 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, delivering 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The A310 is limited to 4 GB on a 64-bit bus, yielding 124.0 GB/s. This 62 GB/s gap affects memory-bound workloads and higher-resolution textures.

Power requirements diverge sharply. The A380 has a 75 W TDP and requires a single 8-pin power connector, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The A310 draws only 30 W, needs no power connectors, and suggests a 200 W PSU. Physical dimensions reflect this: the A380 is a dual-slot card measuring 222 mm in length, 114 mm in height, and 42 mm in width. The A310 is single-slot with no recorded dimensions, indicating a more compact design.

Display outputs differ as well. The A380 provides one HDMI 2.1 port and three DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The A310 offers four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 connectors. Both use a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, so host connectivity is identical.

The A380 launched on June 13, 2022, while the A310 followed on October 11, 2022. Both are now end-of-life products. The A380 had a launch MSRP of 149 USD; no launch MSRP is recorded for the A310. Both succeeded the Xe Graphics line and were succeeded by Battlemage.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc A380 delivers 4.198 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.397 TFLOPS FP16, compared to the A310's 2.688 TFLOPS and 5.376 TFLOPS. The A380 leads by 56% in both metrics.

Q: How large is the average performance gap between the two cards?

A: The average benchmark score for the A380 is 8558, while the A310 averages 7550. This represents a 13.3% difference in favor of the A380.

Q: Does the A310 win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, the A310 wins the PassMark G2D test with a score of 625 versus 610 for the A380, a 2.4% margin. This is the only head-to-head benchmark where the A310 comes out ahead.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The A380 provides 186.0 GB/s from 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus. The A310 offers 124.0 GB/s from 4 GB on a 64-bit bus. The A380 has 50% more bandwidth.

Q: Are the power requirements substantially different?

A: Yes. The A380 has a 75 W TDP and needs a 1x 8-pin power connector with a suggested 250 W PSU. The A310 has a 30 W TDP, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 200 W PSU.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The A380's closest rival is the AMD FirePro W5170M, with a negligible 0.4% score difference. The A310's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 250, also within 0.1%. Both Intel cards sit near the middle of the GPU performance distribution, at the 44th and 40th percentiles respectively.