Intel Arc A310E vs NVIDIA H100 SXM5 64 GB Comparison

The Verdict

The database places these two accelerators at opposite ends of the compute spectrum, with the Intel Arc A310E representing an entry-level graphics and compute solution while the NVIDIA H100 SXM5 64 GB stands as a high-end server accelerator. The recorded specifications show a 21.8x difference in FP32 throughput, a 16.3x difference in memory bandwidth, and a 16x difference in memory capacity. For workloads that require massive parallel throughput, high-bandwidth memory access, and tensor operations, the H100 SXM5 64 GB is the only viable choice based on the data. For lightweight graphics output, display connectivity, and low-power operation, the Arc A310E holds the advantage. The percentile ranking places both at the 50th percentile against all GPUs in the database, though this reflects the absence of benchmark scores rather than equivalent performance. The data indicates the H100 SXM5 64 GB targets server deployment with no display outputs, while the Arc A310E provides four mini-DisplayPort outputs for direct display attachment.

Architecture Differences

The two devices derive from fundamentally different architectures. The Intel Arc A310E uses the DG2-128 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, belonging to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. The NVIDIA H100 SXM5 64 GB uses the GH100 chip built on the Hopper architecture, belonging to the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation. Both are fabricated by TSMC, but on different process nodes: the Arc A310E uses a 6 nm process while the H100 SXM5 uses a 5 nm process. The transistor counts differ enormously, with the Arc A310E containing 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The H100 SXM5 contains 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 98.3M per mm². The H100 SXM5 packs over 11 times more transistors onto a die that is roughly 5.2 times larger, and its transistor density is 2.1 times higher.

The shading resources differ by a similar margin. The Arc A310E provides 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units, along with 6 ray tracing cores. The H100 SXM5 provides 16,896 shading units, 528 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units, along with 528 tensor cores. The H100 SXM5 does not list ray tracing cores in the database, while the Arc A310E does not list tensor cores. The H100 SXM5 has 22 times the shading units, 16.5 times the texture mapping units, and 1.5 times the raster output units compared to the Arc A310E. The API support also differs: the Arc A310E supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the H100 SXM5 lists no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support in the database, consistent with its server-oriented role.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for these two devices, and neither item lists benchmark scores or nearest rivals. The comparison therefore relies entirely on the specification-level data. The most decisive differences appear in raw compute throughput. The Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the H100 SXM5 delivers 66.91 TFLOPS, which is 21.8 times higher. In FP16 workloads, the H100 SXM5 achieves 267.6 TFLOPS using a 4:1 ratio, while the Arc A310E achieves 6.144 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, making the H100 SXM5 43.5 times faster in half-precision throughput. The texture fill rate shows the H100 SXM5 at 1,045.4 GTexel/s versus the Arc A310E at 64.00 GTexel/s, a 16.3 times advantage. The pixel rate favors the H100 SXM5 by a smaller margin: 47.52 GPixel/s versus 32.00 GPixel/s, a 1.5 times difference.

Memory performance separates the two even further. The Arc A310E uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The H100 SXM5 uses 64 GB of HBM3 memory on a 3072-bit bus, delivering 2.02 TB/s of bandwidth. The H100 SXM5 offers 16 times the memory capacity and 16.3 times the memory bandwidth. The memory clock differs substantially as well: the Arc A310E runs its memory at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective data rate, while the H100 SXM5 runs its memory at 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective data rate. The HBM3 interface compensates for the lower per-pin data rate through the extremely wide 3072-bit bus. The H100 SXM5 also maintains a higher peak memory throughput despite the lower effective data rate per pin, which illustrates the impact of bus width on aggregate bandwidth.

Clock speeds present a different picture. The Arc A310E runs at a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz, both higher than the H100 SXM5's base clock of 1665 MHz and boost clock of 1980 MHz. The Arc A310E's boost clock sits 20 MHz above the H100 SXM5's boost clock, and its base clock sits 335 MHz above. This clock advantage does little to close the throughput gap because the H100 SXM5 compensates with far more execution resources. The pixel rate comparison illustrates this: the H100 SXM5 achieves only 1.5 times the pixel throughput of the Arc A310E despite having 22 times the shading units, because the Arc A310E's higher clock and relatively high ROP count per shading unit narrow the difference in this specific metric.

The power envelope shows the starkest divergence between the two devices. The Arc A310E has a TDP of 75 W and requires a suggested power supply of 250 W, while the H100 SXM5 has a TDP of 700 W and requires a suggested power supply of 1100 W. The H100 SXM5 consumes 9.3 times the power of the Arc A310E. When comparing performance per watt, the Arc A310E delivers 0.04096 TFLOPS per watt in FP32, while the H100 SXM5 delivers 0.09559 TFLOPS per watt, making the H100 SXM5 2.3 times more power-efficient in raw FP32 throughput per unit of power. In FP16, the H100 SXM5 delivers 0.3823 TFLOPS per watt versus the Arc A310E's 0.08192 TFLOPS per watt, a 4.7 times efficiency advantage.

Specification Differences

The physical specifications differ in ways that reflect their intended deployment environments. The Arc A310E is a single-slot card measuring 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, with no power connectors required. The H100 SXM5 is an SXM module, with no dimensions listed in the database, and requires an 8-pin EPS power connector. The bus interfaces differ as well: the Arc A310E uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the H100 SXM5 uses PCIe 5.0 x16, providing the H100 SXM5 with a wider and newer interface for data transfer. The display outputs present the clearest functional difference: the Arc A310E provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the H100 SXM5 provides no display outputs at all. The Arc A310E lists a production status of end-of-life, while the H100 SXM5 remains active in production. The release dates place the Arc A310E at 2024-03-31 and the H100 SXM5 at 2023-03-20, making the H100 SXM5 approximately one year older in release timing. The predecessor and successor relationships also differ: the Arc A310E lists Xe Graphics as its predecessor and Battlemage as its successor, while the H100 SXM5 lists Server Ada as its predecessor and Server Blackwell as its successor.

The memory subsystem differences extend beyond capacity and bandwidth. The Arc A310E uses GDDR6 memory, a widely used graphics memory type, while the H100 SXM5 uses HBM3, a high-bandwidth memory type designed for server and accelerator workloads. The bus width difference is substantial: 64 bits for the Arc A310E versus 3072 bits for the H100 SXM5, a 48 times difference. This bus width difference explains how the H100 SXM5 achieves 2.02 TB/s of bandwidth despite its lower memory clock. The Arc A310E's effective memory data rate of 15.5 Gbps is nearly three times the H100 SXM5's 5.3 Gbps effective rate, but the H100 SXM5's 48 times wider bus overwhelms this per-pin advantage.

The compute resource layout shows a similar pattern of specialization. The Arc A310E includes 6 dedicated ray tracing cores, indicating support for real-time ray tracing workloads common in graphics applications. The H100 SXM5 includes 528 tensor cores, indicating heavy investment in matrix and tensor operations for machine learning and scientific computing. Neither device lists the other's specialized hardware: the Arc A310E has no tensor core count in the database, and the H100 SXM5 has no ray tracing core count. This division of specialized resources aligns with their respective roles: the Arc A310E targets graphics rendering, while the H100 SXM5 targets compute acceleration. The FP16 ratio also differs, with the Arc A310E using a 2:1 ratio and the H100 SXM5 using a 4:1 ratio, indicating different approaches to half-precision throughput.

FAQ

Q: Which device delivers higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA H100 SXM5 64 GB delivers 66.91 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 21.8 times higher than the Intel Arc A310E's 3.072 TFLOPS.

Q: How do the memory capacities compare?

A: The H100 SXM5 64 GB provides 64 GB of HBM3 memory, while the Arc A310E provides 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, a 16 times difference in capacity. The H100 SXM5 also delivers 2.02 TB/s of bandwidth versus 124.0 GB/s for the Arc A310E.

Q: Which device supports display output?

A: The Intel Arc A310E provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the NVIDIA H100 SXM5 64 GB lists no display outputs. This makes the Arc A310E suitable for direct display connection, while the H100 SXM5 requires a separate display solution.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Arc A310E has a TDP of 75 W with a suggested power supply of 250 W, while the H100 SXM5 has a TDP of 700 W with a suggested power supply of 1100 W. The H100 SXM5 consumes 9.3 times the power of the Arc A310E.

Q: Which device has tensor cores and which has ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA H100 SXM5 64 GB includes 528 tensor cores, while the Intel Arc A310E includes 6 ray tracing cores. The H100 SXM5 does not list ray tracing cores, and the Arc A310E does not list tensor cores in the database.

Q: How do the clock speeds compare?

A: The Arc A310E runs at a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz, while the H100 SXM5 runs at a base clock of 1665 MHz and a boost clock of 1980 MHz. The Arc A310E has a 335 MHz higher base clock and a 20 MHz higher boost clock.

Q: What are the process node and transistor differences?

A: The Arc A310E uses a 6 nm process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, while the H100 SXM5 uses a 5 nm process with 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die. The H100 SXM5 has 2.1 times higher transistor density at 98.3M per mm² versus 45.9M per mm².

Q: Which device has a wider memory bus?

A: The H100 SXM5 uses a 3072-bit memory bus, while the Arc A310E uses a 64-bit bus. The H100 SXM5's bus is 48 times wider, which enables its high aggregate bandwidth despite a lower effective memory data rate of 5.3 Gbps versus 15.5 Gbps for the Arc A310E.