Intel Arc A310E vs Intel Arc Pro A60M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for the Intel Arc A310E versus the Intel Arc Pro A60M. Neither GPU has recorded benchmark scores, average benchmark scores, or nearest rival data. The wins counter shows zero for both parts. Without measured performance data, a numeric comparison of frame rates, render times, or compute throughput cannot be made from the recorded information. The absence of benchmark entries means the analysis must rely entirely on specification-derived capabilities, clock behavior, and architectural configuration.

Both GPUs share the same Xe-HPG architecture and are built on TSMC's 6 nm process node. The Arc A310E uses the DG2-128 chip, while the Arc Pro A60M uses the DG2-256 chip. The larger die in the Pro A60M contains 11,500 million transistors across 269 mm², compared to 7,200 million transistors across 157 mm² in the A310E. That transistor count difference translates directly into more execution resources: the Pro A60M has 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, 64 render output units, and 16 ray tracing cores. The A310E has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 ray tracing cores. The Pro A60M therefore possesses 2.67 times the shading units, 4 times the TMUs, 4 times the ROPs, and 2.67 times the ray tracing cores compared to the A310E.

Clock speeds invert the resource advantage. The A310E runs at a fixed 2000 MHz for both base and boost, while the Pro A60M operates at a 900 MHz base clock and a 1300 MHz boost clock. The A310E's clocks are 2.22 times higher at base and 1.54 times higher at boost than the Pro A60M's corresponding figures. This clock disparity narrows the throughput gap but does not close it. The A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Pro A60M delivers 5.325 TFLOPS, a 1.73 times advantage for the larger chip. In FP16, the A310E produces 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) versus 10.65 TFLOPS for the Pro A60M, again a 1.73 times difference. Texture rate tells a similar story: 64.00 GTexel/s for the A310E versus 166.4 GTexel/s for the Pro A60M, a 2.6 times gap. Pixel rate shows 32.00 GPixel/s for the A310E versus 83.20 GPixel/s for the Pro A60M, a 2.6 times gap. The higher clock speed of the A310E compensates partially, but the Pro A60M's raw resource count dominates every computed throughput metric.

Memory configuration further separates the two. The A310E carries 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro A60M carries 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro A60M has double the memory capacity and double the memory bandwidth. Effective memory speed is 15.5 Gbps for the A310E and 16 Gbps for the Pro A60M, a minor difference. The bus width doubling is the decisive factor for bandwidth. PCIe interface also differs: the A310E uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Pro A60M uses PCIe 4.0 x16, providing twice the host link width for data transfers.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Arc Pro A60M is the stronger performer on paper across every computational metric recorded in the database. It holds a 1.73 times advantage in FP32 throughput, a 1.73 times advantage in FP16 throughput, a 2.6 times advantage in texture fill rate, a 2.6 times advantage in pixel fill rate, double the memory capacity, double the memory bandwidth, and a wider PCIe link. The Arc A310E counters with a substantially higher clock speed, 2000 MHz versus 1300 MHz boost on the Pro A60M, and a lower power draw of 75 W versus 95 W.

For workloads that depend on raw compute throughput, the Pro A60M is the clear choice based on the specification data. Its 5.325 TFLOPS FP32 figure exceeds the A310E's 3.072 TFLOPS by a wide margin. For workloads that depend on memory bandwidth, such as large data sets or high-resolution textures, the Pro A60M's 256.0 GB/s is exactly double the A310E's 124.0 GB/s. The Pro A60M also has four times the ROPs, which directly impacts fill-rate-bound scenarios.

The A310E's case rests on efficiency and form factor. Its 75 W TDP is 20 W lower than the Pro A60M's 95 W TDP. The A310E is a single-slot card with no power connectors, while the Pro A60M is an integrated graphics processor for portable devices. The A310E has a fixed 168 mm length, 69 mm height, and 20 mm width, whereas the Pro A60M has no listed dimensions because it is an IGP. The A310E's 2000 MHz fixed clock suggests a deterministic performance profile that does not depend on thermal headroom, whereas the Pro A60M's 900 MHz base to 1300 MHz boost range implies variable performance based on cooling and power limits.

Neither GPU has a launch MSRP recorded in the database. The A310E is marked end-of-life with a release date of 2024-03-31, while the Pro A60M is active with a release date of 2023-06-05. The A310E lists a predecessor of Xe Graphics and a successor of Battlemage, while the Pro A60M lists neither.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs use the Intel Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the Alchemist generation. The A310E belongs to the Arc 3 tier, while the Pro A60M belongs to the Pro-Series Mobile tier. This tier distinction reflects positioning rather than a fundamental architecture change. The chip-level difference is significant: the A310E uses DG2-128, and the Pro A60M uses DG2-256. The numeric suffix indicates the relative size of the chip, with DG2-256 being the larger implementation.

The transistor density differs slightly between the two chips. The A310E packs 7,200 million transistors into 157 mm², yielding 45.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The Pro A60M packs 11,500 million transistors into 269 mm², yielding 42.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The A310E has a marginally higher density, but the Pro A60M's absolute transistor count is 4,300 million higher. This additional transistor budget funds the extra shading units, TMUs, ROPs, and ray tracing cores in the Pro A60M.

Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither GPU has tensor cores listed. The ray tracing core count differs: 6 for the A310E versus 16 for the Pro A60M. The A310E has no power connectors and a single-slot form factor, while the Pro A60M is an IGP with portable-device-dependent display outputs. The A310E provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, whereas the Pro A60M's display outputs depend on the host portable device.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs in the database:

| Field | Intel Arc A310E | Intel Arc Pro A60M |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | DG2-128 | DG2-256 |

| Generation | Alchemist (Arc 3) | Alchemist (Pro-Series Mobile) |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 11,500 million |

| Die Size | 157 mm² | 269 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 45.9M / mm² | 42.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2000 MHz | 900 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2000 MHz | 1300 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 124.0 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 32 | 128 |

| ROPs | 16 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 6 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 32.00 GPixel/s | 83.20 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 64.00 GTexel/s | 166.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.072 TFLOPS | 5.325 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1) | 10.65 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 95 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | (not listed) |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | (not listed) |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions | 168 mm x 69 mm x 20 mm | (not listed) |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2024-03-31 | 2023-06-05 |

| Predecessor | Xe Graphics | (not listed) |

| Successor | Battlemage | (not listed) |

Fields that are identical include manufacturer (Intel), architecture (Xe-HPG), process node (6 nm), foundry (TSMC), memory type (GDDR6), API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate 12_2, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4), and the absence of tensor cores and launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60M delivers 5.325 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is 1.73 times the 3.072 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc A310E.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare between the two?

A: The Arc Pro A60M has 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, exactly double the 124.0 GB/s of the Arc A310E. The Pro A60M uses a 128-bit bus with 8 GB of GDDR6, while the A310E uses a 64-bit bus with 4 GB.

Q: What clock speeds does each GPU run at?

A: The Arc A310E runs at a fixed 2000 MHz for both base and boost clocks. The Arc Pro A60M runs at 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost, meaning the A310E has a 2.22 times higher base clock and a 1.54 times higher boost clock.

Q: Are both GPUs built on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both use TSMC's 6 nm process node. The A310E has a transistor density of 45.9 million per mm² on a 157 mm² die, while the Pro A60M has a density of 42.8 million per mm² on a 269 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The Arc Pro A60M has 16 ray tracing cores, compared to 6 ray tracing cores in the Arc A310E. The Pro A60M also has 2048 shading units versus 768 in the A310E.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Arc A310E has a 75 W TDP, while the Arc Pro A60M has a 95 W TDP. The A310E requires a 250 W suggested PSU and uses no power connectors, whereas the Pro A60M is an IGP with no listed PSU requirement.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro A60M wins on every raw performance metric recorded in the database. Its 5.325 TFLOPS FP32 and 10.65 TFLOPS FP16 figures surpass the A310E's 3.072 and 6.144 TFLOPS respectively. The Pro A60M's 166.4 GTexel/s texture rate and 83.20 GPixel/s pixel rate dwarf the A310E's 64.00 GTexel/s and 32.00 GPixel/s. The Pro A60M doubles the memory capacity to 8 GB and doubles the bandwidth to 256.0 GB/s. It also has four times the TMUs and four times the ROPs. For any compute-heavy, texture-heavy, or fill-rate-heavy workload, the Pro A60M is the superior choice based on the specification data. The wider PCIe 4.0 x16 interface also gives it an advantage in host-to-device data transfer scenarios.

The Intel Arc A310E wins on efficiency and packaging. Its 75 W TDP is 20 W lower than the Pro A60M's 95 W TDP. It is a single-slot card with a fixed form factor of 168 mm by 69 mm by 20 mm, no power connectors, and a 250 W suggested PSU. The A310E provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs directly, while the Pro A60M's display outputs depend entirely on the portable device it is integrated into. The A310E's fixed 2000 MHz clock means no boost variability, which can be advantageous for deterministic performance in constrained thermal environments. The A310E also has a higher transistor density at 45.9 million per mm² versus 42.8 million per mm², though this is a minor distinction. The A310E is marked as end-of-life with a successor listed as Battlemage, whereas the Pro A60M remains active. For a standalone, low-power, single-slot graphics card with direct display outputs, the A310E fits that use case. For maximum compute and memory throughput in a portable device, the Pro A60M is the data-supported choice.