Intel Arc A310 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a comprehensive victory for the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 across every single recorded test. Out of the nine head-to-head benchmarks, the Quadro P2200 wins all nine, with the Intel Arc A310 failing to claim a single test. The margin of victory varies substantially by workload, ranging from a modest single-digit percentage lead to a dominant triple-digit advantage.

Starting with compute-oriented tests, the Geekbench OpenCL score favors the Quadro P2200 at 32,344 versus 30,607 for the Arc A310, a 5.7% lead. The Geekbench Vulkan test tells a similar story, with the Quadro P2200 scoring 31,351 compared to the Arc A310's 28,964, an 8.2% advantage. These are the closest margins in the entire comparison, suggesting that general-purpose compute performance is the most competitive area between the two cards.

The gap widens considerably when examining DirectX workloads. In the Passmark DirectX 10 test, the Quadro P2200 scores 45 against the Arc A310's 31, a 45.2% difference. The DirectX 11 test shows an even more pronounced separation: the Quadro P2200 delivers 70 points while the Arc A310 manages only 33, which translates to a 112.1% lead for the NVIDIA card. DirectX 12 narrows the gap somewhat, with the Quadro P2200 at 33 and the Arc A310 at 29, a 13.8% edge. The legacy DirectX 9 benchmark produces the largest relative disparity of any test, with the Quadro P2200 scoring 167 versus 69 for the Arc A310, a 142% difference.

The 2D and 3D graphics tests continue the pattern. In the Passmark G2D test, the Quadro P2200 scores 881 compared to the Arc A310's 625, a 41% advantage. The Passmark G3D test, which is often considered a strong proxy for overall gaming and graphics performance, shows the Quadro P2200 at 9,364 versus 5,433 for the Arc A310, a 72.4% lead. Finally, the Passmark GPU Compute test shows the Quadro P2200 at 3,921 against the Arc A310's 2,157, an 81.8% margin.

The average benchmark score reinforces this hierarchy. The Quadro P2200 holds an average score of 8,686, while the Arc A310 averages 7,550. This places the Quadro P2200 in the 44th percentile of all GPUs, while the Arc A310 sits at the 40th percentile. Looking at the nearest rivals for each card, the Quadro P2200 is 1.5% ahead of the Intel Arc A380 and 1.1% ahead of the AMD FirePro W5170M, while trailing the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile by 0.7% each. The Arc A310, by contrast, is 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 and 1.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 8850M, while trailing the AMD Radeon R7 250 by 0.1% and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 by 0.4%.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded data, the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 wins in every scenario measured. There is no benchmark category in which the Intel Arc A310 emerges ahead. The Quadro P2200's largest advantages come in legacy DirectX workloads, particularly DirectX 9 with a 142% lead and DirectX 11 with a 112.1% lead. These results suggest that the Quadro P2200 is substantially stronger in older API environments, which may matter for applications that have not yet migrated to modern graphics APIs.

The Quadro P2200 also shows significant strength in compute-heavy tasks, with the GPU Compute test showing an 81.8% advantage and the G3D test showing a 72.4% lead. These are substantial margins that indicate the Quadro P2200 is the clear choice for tasks that stress raw graphics throughput and parallel processing.

The Intel Arc A310, while losing every test, is closest to the Quadro P2200 in the Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan benchmarks. The 5.7% and 8.2% deltas, respectively, show that the Arc A310 can approach the Quadro P2200's performance in general compute workloads. However, even in these favorable tests, the Arc A310 does not manage to overtake the NVIDIA card.

For users considering the Arc A310, the data suggests it is competitive only in scenarios where the workload is heavily compute-oriented and not reliant on legacy graphics paths. The DirectX 12 test, where the Arc A310 trails by just 13.8%, is the next-closest category, indicating that the Arc A310's modern feature set helps it close the gap in contemporary API environments, but it still falls short.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 uses the GP106 chip based on the Pascal architecture, produced on a 16 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc A310 uses the DG2-128 chip based on the Xe-HPG architecture, also produced at TSMC but on a 6 nm process. The process node difference is significant: the Arc A310's 6 nm node allows for a much higher transistor density of 45.9 million transistors per square millimeter, compared to 22.0 million per square millimeter for the Quadro P2200.

The transistor counts reflect this difference. The Arc A310 packs 7,200 million transistors into a die size of 157 mm², while the Quadro P2200 contains 4,400 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. Despite having fewer transistors, the Quadro P2200's larger die and older process node still manage to deliver superior benchmark results.

Memory configurations also differ substantially. The Quadro P2200 features 5 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 200.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Arc A310 offers 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a much narrower 64-bit bus, resulting in 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro P2200's memory bandwidth advantage of roughly 76 GB/s is likely a contributing factor to its performance lead, particularly in bandwidth-sensitive workloads.

Clock speeds show the Arc A310 running at a higher base and boost clock of 1,750 MHz, while the Quadro P2200 runs at 1,000 MHz base and 1,493 MHz boost. The Arc A310's memory clock is also higher at 1,937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective speed, compared to the Quadro P2200's 1,251 MHz with 10 Gbps effective. However, the Quadro P2200's wider memory bus compensates for the lower clock speed, resulting in higher overall bandwidth.

The compute unit configurations are markedly different. The Quadro P2200 has 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 40 raster output units. The Arc A310 has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Quadro P2200 also has higher pixel rate at 59.72 GPixel/s versus 28.00 GPixel/s, and higher texture rate at 119.4 GTexel/s versus 56.00 GTexel/s. In terms of floating-point performance, the Quadro P2200 delivers 3.822 TFLOPS of FP32, while the Arc A310 delivers 2.688 TFLOPS. The FP16 comparison is starkly different: the Arc A310 offers 5.376 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the Quadro P2200 provides only 59.72 GFLOPS with a 1:64 ratio, making the Arc A310 far more capable in half-precision workloads.

The Arc A310 includes 6 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Quadro P2200. The Arc A310 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Quadro P2200 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The Arc A310 uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the Quadro P2200 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Power consumption favors the Arc A310, with a TDP of 30 W compared to the Quadro P2200's 75 W.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins the most benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 wins all nine recorded head-to-head benchmarks. The Intel Arc A310 wins zero tests in the comparison.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest gap is in the Passmark DirectX 9 test, where the Quadro P2200 scores 167 versus 69 for the Arc A310, a 142% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: Is the Arc A310 competitive in any workload?

A: The Arc A310 comes closest in Geekbench OpenCL, trailing by 5.7%, and in Geekbench Vulkan, trailing by 8.2%. These are the smallest deltas in the dataset, but the Arc A310 still loses both tests.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The Quadro P2200 has 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 160-bit bus with 200.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc A310 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more ray tracing capabilities?

A: The Intel Arc A310 includes 6 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 has no ray tracing cores in its specification.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Arc A310 has a TDP of 30 W and a suggested PSU of 200 W. The Quadro P2200 has a TDP of 75 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 outperforms the Intel Arc A310 in every single recorded benchmark, with margins ranging from 5.7% to 142%. The Quadro P2200's wins span legacy DirectX APIs, modern graphics tests, and compute workloads, making it the superior choice for virtually any application measured in this database.

Users who prioritize legacy API compatibility or raw graphics throughput should select the Quadro P2200. Its 112.1% lead in DirectX 11 and 142% lead in DirectX 9 are particularly decisive for environments running older software. The Quadro P2200 also offers significantly higher memory bandwidth at 200.2 GB/s, a wider 160-bit bus, and more shading units, TMUs, and ROPs than the Arc A310.

The Intel Arc A310 does have some redeeming qualities in its specification, including a smaller 30 W TDP, 6 ray tracing cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and a more advanced 6 nm process node with higher transistor density. Its FP16 performance of 5.376 TFLOPS is also far superior to the Quadro P2200's 59.72 GFLOPS. However, none of these advantages translate into benchmark wins in the recorded data.

The average benchmark scores place the Quadro P2200 at 8,686 versus 7,550 for the Arc A310, and the percentile rankings reflect this gap, with the Quadro P2200 at the 44th percentile and the Arc A310 at the 40th percentile. The nearest rival comparisons show the Quadro P2200 competing with cards like the GeForce GTX 460 v2 and RTX 3050 A Mobile, while the Arc A310 aligns with the Radeon R7 250 and Radeon Pro WX 3100. For any task covered by these benchmarks, the Quadro P2200 is the clear pick, and the Arc A310 should only be considered if its specific feature set, such as ray tracing or low power draw, is an absolute requirement.