Intel Arc A310 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Arc A310 is the decisive winner in this comparison. Benchmark data shows the Arc A310 scores 30,607 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 scores 6,698. That is a 357% advantage for the Intel part, which places it in an entirely different performance tier. The GT 1010, by contrast, sits near the bottom of the database with an average benchmark score of 6,698, placing it at the 38th percentile of all GPUs. The Arc A310 averages 7,550 across all recorded tests, which lands it at the 40th percentile, but its OpenCL result alone is enough to show that the two cards are not competitors in any practical sense.

For users seeking any level of modern gaming capability, the Arc A310 is the only viable option between the two. The GT 1010 is best suited for basic display output, office workloads, or legacy systems where 3D performance is not a priority. The data does not support any scenario where the GT 1010 outperforms the Arc A310. In every recorded head-to-head benchmark, the Intel card wins. The GT 1010 has zero wins in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural generations. The Intel Arc A310 uses the DG2-128 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist generation (Arc 3). It is manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC, containing 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9 million per mm². The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 uses the GP108 chip based on the older Pascal architecture from the GeForce 10 generation. It is built on a 14 nm process at Samsung, with 1,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 24.3 million per mm². The Arc A310 packs four times the transistor count and more than double the die area, while using a significantly more advanced manufacturing node.

Memory configurations differ substantially. The Arc A310 comes with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GT 1010 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, also on a 64-bit bus, but only reaches 48.06 GB/s. That means the Intel card has roughly 2.6 times the memory bandwidth, which directly impacts texture throughput and resolution handling.

Compute resources show a wide gap. The Arc A310 has 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units, along with 6 dedicated ray tracing cores. The GT 1010 has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, with no ray tracing hardware at all. The Intel card also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GT 1010 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the Arc A310's feature set is clearly aimed at modern workloads.

Clock speeds also favor the Intel part. The Arc A310 runs at a base and boost clock of 1750 MHz, while memory operates at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective). The GT 1010 has a base clock of 1228 MHz and a boost of 1468 MHz, with memory at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective). Both cards have a 30 W TDP, use no power connectors, and fit in a single slot with a suggested power supply of 200 W. The Arc A310 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the GT 1010 uses the older PCIe 3.0 x4 interface.

The Arc A310 provides four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, whereas the GT 1010 offers one DVI and one mini-HDMI 2.0. This makes the Intel card far more flexible for multi-monitor setups. The GT 1010 measures 147 mm (5.8 inches) in length; the Arc A310's dimensions are not recorded in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc A310 delivers 2.688 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, compared to 751.6 GFLOPS for the GT 1010. The Arc A310 is approximately 3.6 times faster in this metric, which aligns with its 357% lead in Geekbench OpenCL.

Q: Does the GT 1010 have any feature that the Arc A310 lacks?

A: The database records no such advantage. The Arc A310 has ray tracing cores, a newer DirectX feature level, more memory, higher bandwidth, and more display outputs. The GT 1010's only unique characteristics are its smaller die, lower transistor count, and older PCIe interface.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Arc A310 has an average benchmark score of 7,550 across all recorded tests, while the GT 1010 averages 6,698. The Arc A310 sits at the 40th percentile of all GPUs, and the GT 1010 sits at the 38th percentile. Despite similar percentiles, the Arc A310's OpenCL score is dramatically higher, suggesting its average is weighed down by other tests.

Q: Can the GT 1010 handle ray tracing?

A: No. The GT 1010 has no ray tracing cores, while the Arc A310 includes 6 dedicated RT cores. The Intel card also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which includes ray tracing and mesh shaders, while the GT 1010 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: Which card is better for multi-monitor setups?

A: The Arc A310 is the clear choice. It offers four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, whereas the GT 1010 provides only one DVI and one mini-HDMI 2.0. The Intel card can drive multiple displays without adapters, while the GT 1010 is limited to two outputs.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life in the database. The Arc A310 was released on October 11, 2022, and the GT 1010 on January 12, 2021. The Arc A310's predecessor is Xe Graphics and its successor is Battlemage. The GT 1010's predecessor is the GeForce 900 series and its successor is the GeForce 20 series.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every technical specification. The process node is 6 nm for the Arc A310 versus 14 nm for the GT 1010. Transistor counts are 7,200 million versus 1,800 million, and die sizes are 157 mm² versus 74 mm². Transistor density is 45.9M per mm² versus 24.3M per mm².

Memory is 4 GB GDDR6 versus 2 GB GDDR5. Bandwidth is 124.0 GB/s versus 48.06 GB/s. The bus width is the same at 64 bit, but the effective memory speed is 15.5 Gbps versus 6 Gbps.

Shading units are 768 versus 256. TMUs are 32 versus 16. ROPs are 16 versus 8. The Arc A310 has 6 RT cores; the GT 1010 has none. Pixel rate is 28.00 GPixel/s versus 11.74 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 56.00 GTexel/s versus 23.49 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 2.688 TFLOPS versus 751.6 GFLOPS. The Arc A310 also has FP16 capability at 5.376 TFLOPS (2:1), while the GT 1010 has no recorded FP16 data.

Clocks differ: base 1750 MHz versus 1228 MHz, boost 1750 MHz versus 1468 MHz, and memory 1937 MHz versus 1502 MHz. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x4. Display outputs are 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 versus 1x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 2.0. DirectX support is 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1). The GT 1010 has a recorded length of 147 mm (5.8 inches); the Arc A310's dimensions are not listed. Both have 30 W TDP, no power connectors, a suggested PSU of 200 W, and single-slot designs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The Intel Arc A310 scores 30,607, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 scores 6,698. The Arc A310 wins by 357%. This is not a marginal victory; it is a multi-generational gap in compute throughput. The GT 1010's score is less than a quarter of the Intel card's result.

Looking at the nearest rivals for context, the Arc A310's average score of 7,550 places it within 1% of the AMD Radeon R7 250 (7,557, delta -0.1%), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7,580, delta -0.4%), and slightly ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7,472, delta +1%) and AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7,447, delta +1.4%). This suggests the Arc A310's overall average is dragged down by older DirectX tests, while its modern compute performance is far stronger.

The GT 1010's average score of 6,698 puts it between the AMD Radeon R7 M370 (6,764, delta -1%) and the AMD Radeon R7 M460 (6,612, delta +1.3%), with the AMD Radeon HD 7730M (6,581, delta +1.8%) and AMD FirePro M5100 (6,830, delta -1.9%) nearby. These are all low-end mobile or entry-level desktop parts, which confirms the GT 1010's position as a basic display adapter.

The Arc A310 also records individual benchmark scores that show its strengths and weaknesses. In Passmark G3D, it scores 5,433, which is a respectable result for a 30 W card. Its Passmark GPU Compute score is 2,157. However, its DirectX 9 score is only 69, its DirectX 10 score is 31, DirectX 11 is 33, and DirectX 12 is 29. These low legacy scores explain why its average is much lower than its OpenCL result. The GT 1010 has no recorded results for these legacy tests, only the single OpenCL score.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A310 wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its strengths are in modern compute workloads, as shown by the 30,607 OpenCL score, which is 357% ahead of the GT 1010. It also has superior specifications across the board: more memory, higher bandwidth, more shading units, higher clocks, and dedicated ray tracing hardware. For anyone running modern games, content creation applications, or GPU-accelerated compute tasks, the Arc A310 is the only choice between these two.

The Arc A310's high pixel rate of 28.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 56.00 GTexel/s mean it can handle higher resolutions and more complex scenes than the GT 1010. The 4 GB VRAM is double the GT 1010's 2 GB, which allows larger textures and assets without spilling into system memory. The four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs also make it suitable for multi-monitor productivity setups.

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 has no benchmark wins in the database. Its advantages are limited to physical characteristics: it is smaller at 147 mm in length, uses an older but simpler PCIe 3.0 x4 interface, and has a lower transistor count that may appeal to legacy system compatibility. It also offers a DVI output, which some older monitors still require. However, none of these translate into performance advantages.

For users with very old operating systems or software that relies on DVI output, the GT 1010 might serve as a replacement display adapter. For anyone who needs actual 3D rendering, modern API support, or ray tracing, the Arc A310 is the only rational pick. The data is unambiguous: the Arc A310 wins the head-to-head benchmark by a 357% margin, and the GT 1010 has zero recorded victories.