Intel Arc A310 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints a decisive picture: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile wins 7 of 8 head-to-head tests, with the Intel Arc A310 taking a single victory. The margins are not subtle. In PassMark's DirectX 11 test, the NVIDIA part scores 94 against Intel's 33, a delta of 184.8%. That is the largest single gap in the comparison, and it reflects a consistent pattern across legacy and modern APIs alike.

DirectX 9 shows the RTX 3050 A Mobile at 152 versus 69 for the Arc A310, a 120.3% advantage. DirectX 10 follows with 61 against 31, a 96.8% lead. DirectX 12 narrows the relative gap slightly, with 55 versus 29, an 89.7% delta. These results indicate that NVIDIA's architecture maintains a strong lead across API generations, not just in one specific workload.

The compute-focused tests reinforce the same story. In PassMark GPU Compute, the RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 4419, while the Arc A310 manages 2157, a 104.9% difference. Geekbench OpenCL shows 52998 for NVIDIA versus 30607 for Intel, a 73.2% lead. The overall PassMark G3D score, which aggregates gaming-oriented DirectX performance, lands at 11664 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile against 5433 for the Arc A310, a 114.7% delta.

The sole Intel victory comes in PassMark G2D, a 2D graphics and desktop composition test. Here the Arc A310 scores 625, beating the NVIDIA part's 526 by 15.8%. This is a notable outlier, suggesting Intel's driver and display pipeline handles 2D workloads more efficiently, but it does little to offset the 3D and compute deficits.

When placed in the broader database context, the RTX 3050 A Mobile sits at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8746. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2, scores 8743, a negligible 0% delta. The Quadro P2200 trails by 0.7%, while the AMD Radeon R9 M265X and Radeon Pro WX 5100 lead by 1.2% and 1.3% respectively. The Arc A310, by contrast, sits at the 40th percentile with an average score of 7550. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon R7 250, is effectively tied at 7557, a 0.1% delta. The Radeon Pro WX 3100 trails by 0.4%, while the GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon HD 8850M lead by 1% and 1.4%. The percentile gap of 4 points, combined with the 1196-point average score difference, places the NVIDIA part in a clearly higher performance tier.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher raw compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile delivers 4.813 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc A310 delivers 2.688 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA part also leads in PassMark GPU Compute with 4419 versus 2157, a 104.9% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A310 win any benchmark category?

A: Yes, the Arc A310 wins the PassMark G2D test with a score of 625 against 526 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, a 15.8% margin. This is the only head-to-head test where Intel takes the lead.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in DirectX 12 performance?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 55 in PassMark DirectX 12, while the Arc A310 scores 29, giving NVIDIA an 89.7% lead. This is the smallest relative gap among the DirectX tests, but still a substantial margin.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile has an average benchmark score of 8746, while the Arc A310 averages 7550. The NVIDIA part sits at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 40th percentile for Intel.

Q: Are both GPUs compatible with the latest graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so they are equally capable in terms of API feature support.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The Intel Arc A310 has a transistor density of 45.9M per mm², slightly higher than the NVIDIA part's 43.5M per mm². This comes despite the Intel chip being fabricated on a 6nm process versus 8nm for NVIDIA.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the GA106 chip, built on the Ampere architecture and fabricated by Samsung on an 8nm process. The chip contains 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 43.5M per mm². The Intel Arc A310 uses the DG2-128 chip, based on the Xe-HPG architecture and fabricated by TSMC on a 6nm process. It packs 7,200 million transistors into a 157 mm² die, achieving a slightly higher density of 45.9M per mm². The smaller die and newer process node give Intel a manufacturing advantage, but the NVIDIA chip's larger transistor budget translates into more raw compute resources.

The NVIDIA part fields 1792 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. It also includes 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores, the latter enabling AI-accelerated features. The Intel Arc A310 offers 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with 6 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The shading unit count difference alone, 1792 versus 768, explains much of the compute gap observed in the benchmarks. The NVIDIA part also has a higher pixel rate at 42.98 GPixel/s versus 28.00 GPixel/s, and a higher texture rate at 75.21 GTexel/s versus 56.00 GTexel/s.

In terms of FP16 performance, the architectures diverge. The RTX 3050 A Mobile delivers FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 4.813 TFLOPS. The Arc A310, by contrast, offers FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, delivering 5.376 TFLOPS of FP16 against 2.688 TFLOPS of FP32. This means the Intel part can outperform the NVIDIA GPU in half-precision workloads where the extra throughput is exploitable, though the benchmark suite here shows no such test.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so the API feature set is identical. The NVIDIA part is designated as an integrated graphics package (IGP) with portable-device-dependent display outputs, while the Intel part is a single-slot add-in card with four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The Intel card also carries a suggested PSU rating of 200 W, whereas the NVIDIA part has no suggested PSU spec, consistent with its mobile-integrated positioning.

Specification Differences

The most striking difference is in memory bandwidth. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses a 128-bit bus with 4 GB of GDDR6 at 12 Gbps effective, yielding 192.0 GB/s. The Arc A310 also has 4 GB of GDDR6, but on a 64-bit bus at 15.5 Gbps effective, yielding only 124.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA part thus enjoys a 54.8% bandwidth advantage, which directly impacts texture-heavy and high-resolution workloads.

Clock speeds also differ. The NVIDIA GPU runs at a 1065 MHz base and 1343 MHz boost, while the Intel part runs at a flat 1750 MHz for both base and boost. The higher clock rate on the Arc A310 partially compensates for its fewer cores, but not enough to close the performance gap.

Power consumption is another clear divider. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has a TDP of 45 W, while the Arc A310 draws 30 W. The NVIDIA part is a 45 W mobile chip, while the Intel part is a 30 W single-slot desktop card. The power difference of 15 W is modest, but it underscores the NVIDIA part's higher performance envelope.

The bus interface is identical at PCIe 4.0 x8. Both use GDDR6 memory, and both are listed as end-of-life products. The NVIDIA part was released at the end of 2023, while the Intel part came out in late 2022. The Intel part is the successor to Xe Graphics and is succeeded by Battlemage, while the NVIDIA part is the successor to GeForce 20 Mobile with no listed successor.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile is the clear choice for 3D gaming and compute-heavy tasks. Its wins in DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, combined with a 114.7% lead in PassMark G3D and a 104.9% lead in GPU Compute, make it the stronger option for any application that relies on rasterization, shading, or general-purpose GPU compute. The 1792 shading units and 56 tensor cores provide headroom for modern game engines and AI-assisted features, while the 192.0 GB/s memory bandwidth supports higher resolution textures and more complex scenes. The data indicates this GPU is suited for gaming laptops or compact systems where 45 W of power is available and 3D performance is a priority.

The Intel Arc A310 finds its niche in 2D desktop workloads. Its 15.8% win in PassMark G2D suggests the driver stack and display engine are optimized for compositing, video playback, and general desktop productivity. The 30 W TDP and single-slot form factor make it an easy fit for small-form-factor builds, and the four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs offer multi-monitor flexibility. For users whose primary tasks are office work, web browsing, or media consumption, the Arc A310's 2D strength and lower power draw are reasonable trade-offs. However, the benchmark data is unambiguous: for any 3D or compute workload, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is the superior performer, and the 73.2% to 184.8% margins across all 3D and compute tests leave little room for argument.