Intel Arc A310E vs Intel Arc B770 Comparison

The Verdict

The database records show two Intel GPUs at opposite ends of the Arc spectrum. The Intel Arc A310E is an entry-level, end-of-life Alchemist part designed for low-power systems, with a 75 W TDP, 4 GB of memory, and a single-slot chassis. The Intel Arc B770 is a high-end Battlemage part with a 225 W TDP, 16 GB of memory, a dual-slot cooler, and a far larger silicon footprint. The recorded data shows no overlapping benchmark wins between the two: the A310E wins zero head-to-head tests, while the B770 wins zero as well, which means the comparison rests entirely on their architectural and specification differences rather than measured performance scores.

For users operating within a 75 W power envelope, the A310E is the only viable option in this pairing, as it requires no external power connectors and suggests a 250 W power supply. For anyone needing substantial memory capacity, high bandwidth, or heavy compute throughput, the B770 is the clear selection, given its 16 GB frame buffer, 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 19.66 TFLOPS FP32 throughput. The data offers no middle ground: the A310E serves constrained, low-profile environments, while the B770 serves demanding workloads that can tolerate a 550 W suggested power supply.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs belong to different Intel architectures and process nodes. The Arc A310E uses the DG2-128 chip built on Xe-HPG architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm TSMC process. It contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The Arc B770 uses the BMG-G31 chip built on Xe2-HPG architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm TSMC process. Its die size is 368 mm², more than double the A310E footprint, though its transistor count is not recorded in the database.

The A310E belongs to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation, while the B770 belongs to the Battlemage (Arc 7) generation. The A310E lists Xe Graphics as its predecessor and Battlemage as its successor, which positions it as the tail end of the Alchemist line. The B770 lists Alchemist as its predecessor, reinforcing the generational handoff. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level feature support is identical in the recorded data.

The compute resources differ by a factor of roughly five. The A310E has 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 render output units, and 6 ray tracing cores. The B770 has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores. Neither card lists tensor cores in the database. Pixel rate scales accordingly: the A310E delivers 32.00 GPixel/s, while the B770 delivers 307.2 GPixel/s. Texture rate jumps from 64.00 GTexel/s on the A310E to 614.4 GTexel/s on the B770.

Clock behavior also differs. The A310E runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost, with memory at 1937 MHz, or 15.5 Gbps effective. The B770 runs at 2100 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, with memory at 2000 MHz, or 16 Gbps effective. The B770 therefore has a higher boost ceiling and faster memory clock, though the decisive difference is the bus width and memory configuration.

Where Each One Wins

The A310E wins in power efficiency and physical footprint. Its 75 W TDP requires no power connectors, fits a single-slot design, and suggests a modest 250 W power supply. Its dimensions are recorded at 168 mm length, 69 mm height, and 20 mm width. It uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and outputs video through four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 connectors. These traits make it suited to compact systems where slot width, power draw, and thermal output are constrained.

The B770 wins in every compute and memory category. It offers 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is over four times the 124.0 GB/s of the A310E. Its FP32 throughput of 19.66 TFLOPS is more than six times the 3.072 TFLOPS of the A310E. FP16 throughput follows the same ratio: 39.32 TFLOPS versus 6.144 TFLOPS, both at a 2:1 ratio. The B770 also uses a wider PCIe 4.0 x16 interface and provides one HDMI 2.1a port plus three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, whereas the A310E provides only mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs.

The B770's power delivery is correspondingly higher. It requires a dual-slot cooler, one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector, and a suggested 550 W power supply. Its release date is recorded as the end of 2025, while the A310E was released in March 2024 and is marked end-of-life. The B770 is the newer part by roughly two years and is not marked as end-of-life in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Arc B770 has 512.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, compared to 124.0 GB/s on the Arc A310E.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What power supply does each GPU require?

A: The A310E suggests a 250 W power supply and draws 75 W, while the B770 suggests a 550 W power supply and draws 225 W.

Q: How many display outputs does each card have?

A: The A310E has four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The B770 has one HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

Q: Which GPU uses a larger die?

A: The B770 uses a 368 mm² die, while the A310E uses a 157 mm² die.

Q: What is the release status of each card?

A: The A310E was released in March 2024 and is marked end-of-life. The B770 has a release date at the end of 2025 and no production status is recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for this pairing, and neither GPU has an average benchmark score or a nearest-rival list. Both are recorded with a percentile of 50 against all GPUs, which is a neutral placeholder rather than a measured result. As such, the analysis must rely on the recorded specification data to establish the performance gap.

The largest single difference is memory bandwidth. The B770 delivers 512.0 GB/s, which is 4.13 times the 124.0 GB/s of the A310E. This gap directly affects texture streaming, high-resolution frame buffers, and compute workloads that move large data sets. The B770's 16 GB capacity is four times the 4 GB on the A310E, which removes capacity limits for large scenes or multi-tasking workloads.

Compute throughput shows a similar ratio. The B770's FP32 figure of 19.66 TFLOPS is 6.4 times the 3.072 TFLOPS of the A310E. FP16 scales identically: 39.32 TFLOPS versus 6.144 TFLOPS. Texture rate on the B770 is 614.4 GTexel/s, which is 9.6 times the 64.00 GTexel/s of the A310E. Pixel rate on the B770 is 307.2 GPixel/s, which is 9.6 times the 32.00 GPixel/s of the A310E. These ratios indicate that the B770 is not merely a larger chip, but a proportionally wider design across all fixed-function units.

The ray tracing core count also differs sharply. The B770 has 32 ray tracing cores, while the A310E has 6, a ratio of 5.33 to 1. This suggests a substantial difference in ray-traced workloads, though no benchmark data is available to quantify the real-world impact.

Clock speeds narrow the gap slightly. The A310E runs at a constant 2000 MHz, while the B770 boosts to 2400 MHz. The B770's 20% boost advantage over the A310E's fixed clock helps it extract more work from each shading unit, but the core count difference dominates the comparison.

Memory clock differences are minor: 2000 MHz on the B770 versus 1937 MHz on the A310E. The effective data rate of 16 Gbps versus 15.5 Gbps is a 3.2% difference. The bus width difference of 256-bit versus 64-bit is the true driver of the bandwidth gap.

Shading unit count goes from 768 on the A310E to 4096 on the B770, a 5.33 times increase. TMUs go from 32 to 256, an 8 times increase. ROPs go from 16 to 128, also an 8 times increase. The B770 is wider in every measured unit, with the largest relative gains in texture and pixel throughput.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded field. The A310E uses a DG2-128 chip on a 6 nm process, while the B770 uses a BMG-G31 chip on a 5 nm process. Die size is 157 mm² for the A310E and 368 mm² for the B770. Transistor count is 7,200 million for the A310E, while the B770's transistor count is recorded as unknown. Transistor density is 45.9M per mm² for the A310E, with no figure for the B770.

Base clocks are 2000 MHz for the A310E and 2100 MHz for the B770. Boost clocks are 2000 MHz for the A310E and 2400 MHz for the B770. Memory clocks are 1937 MHz for the A310E and 2000 MHz for the B770, with effective rates of 15.5 Gbps and 16 Gbps respectively.

Memory configuration differs completely. The A310E has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The B770 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute resources: 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 ray tracing cores on the A310E, versus 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores on the B770. Pixel rate is 32.00 GPixel/s versus 307.2 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 64.00 GTexel/s versus 614.4 GTexel/s. FP32 is 3.072 TFLOPS versus 19.66 TFLOPS. FP16 is 6.144 TFLOPS versus 39.32 TFLOPS, both at a 2:1 ratio.

Power and cooling differ substantially. The A310E has a 75 W TDP, a single-slot design, no power connectors, and a 250 W suggested power supply. The B770 has a 225 W TDP, a dual-slot design, one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector, and a 550 W suggested power supply.

Bus interfaces differ: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the A310E, PCIe 4.0 x16 for the B770. Display outputs differ: four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 for the A310E, one HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1 for the B770.

Physical dimensions are only recorded for the A310E: 168 mm length, 69 mm height, 20 mm width. The B770 has no dimensions in the database. Release dates are March 2024 for the A310E and the end of December 2025 for the B770. The A310E is marked end-of-life, while the B770 has no production status recorded. Neither card has a recorded launch MSRP, benchmark score, or nearest rivals.