Intel Arc A310E vs NVIDIA H200 NVL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Arc A310E has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. The NVIDIA H200 NVL, by contrast, posts a single Geekbench OpenCL score of 334,891 points, placing it at the 100th percentile of all GPUs tracked. This means the H200 NVL outperforms every other GPU in the database in this compute test, while the A310E has no comparable measurement to anchor its position.

The H200 NVL's nearest rivals in the database provide context for its score. The NVIDIA B200 leads with 345,482 points, which is 3.1% ahead of the H200 NVL. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC posts 369,831 points, a 9.4% advantage. On the other side, the AMD Instinct MI300X scores 317,994 points, which is 5.3% behind the H200 NVL, and the NVIDIA L40S trails by 13.2% with 295,763 points. These deltas show the H200 NVL sits just below the top-tier accelerators while decisively outrunning the L40S and MI300X.

The Arc A310E's absence from the benchmark database means no head-to-head comparison can be quantified. The database records zero wins for either part in a direct matchup. What the data does show is a structural asymmetry: one product is an entry-level graphics adapter with a 50th percentile ranking, the other is a server-class accelerator at the 100th percentile. The gap in raw compute output is enormous, and the recorded numbers confirm it.

The FP32 throughput figures reinforce this divide. The H200 NVL delivers 60.32 TFLOPS, while the Arc A310E manages 3.072 TFLOPS. That is a 19.6x difference in favor of the NVIDIA part. FP16 performance follows the same pattern: the H200 NVL reaches 120.6 TFLOPS versus 6.144 TFLOPS for the Arc A310E, a 19.6x margin again. Texture rate tells a similar story, with the H200 NVL at 942.5 GTexel/s compared to 64.00 GTexel/s for the A310E.

Pixel rate narrows the gap somewhat. The H200 NVL outputs 42.84 GPixel/s, while the A310E produces 32.00 GPixel/s. That is a 33.9% advantage for the NVIDIA part, still substantial but far smaller than the compute or texture deltas. This makes sense given the different rasterization targets: the A310E is built for display output and light graphics work, while the H200 NVL has no display outputs at all.

The memory subsystem widens the divide further. The H200 NVL carries 141 GB of HBM3e across a 6144-bit bus, yielding 4.89 TB/s of bandwidth. The Arc A310E ships with 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 124.0 GB/s. The bandwidth ratio is roughly 39.4x, and the capacity ratio is 35.25x. Any workload that scales with memory size or bandwidth will see the H200 NVL dominate by orders of magnitude.

Architecture Differences

The two products come from different design lineages entirely. The Intel Arc A310E uses the DG2-128 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist generation for Arc 3 products. This is a 6 nm TSMC design with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The NVIDIA H200 NVL uses the GH100 chip on the Hopper architecture, part of the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation. It is a 5 nm TSMC design with 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, reaching a density of 98.3M per mm². The H200 NVL packs over 11 times more transistors into a die roughly 5.2 times larger.

The Intel part is a rasterization-oriented GPU with 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 ray tracing cores. It has no tensor cores. The NVIDIA part is a compute accelerator with 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 528 tensor cores. The database lists no ray tracing cores for the H200 NVL, which positions it as a dedicated compute engine rather than a graphics renderer.

Memory technology separates the two clearly. The A310E uses GDDR6, a common graphics memory standard, with a modest 64-bit interface. The H200 NVL uses HBM3e, a high-bandwidth stacked memory design, across a 6144-bit interface. The bus width difference, 96x, explains the bandwidth gap despite the H200 NVL's lower effective memory clock of 6.4 Gbps versus 15.5 Gbps for the A310E.

Clock behavior differs as well. The Arc A310E runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost, suggesting a fixed-frequency design. The H200 NVL has a base clock of 1365 MHz and a boost clock of 1785 MHz, indicating a dynamic clocking scheme that scales under load. The A310E's higher clocks do not compensate for its far smaller execution resource pool.

API support marks another divergence. The Arc A310E supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it a full-featured graphics card. The H200 NVL lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, confirming it is not intended for traditional graphics rendering. Display outputs reinforce this: the A310E has four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 connectors, while the H200 NVL has no outputs.

Power and physical design also differ substantially. The A310E consumes 75 W with no power connectors and fits in a single slot, measuring 168 mm by 69 mm by 20 mm. The H200 NVL draws 600 W, requires an 8-pin EPS connector, occupies a dual-slot form factor, and measures 267 mm by 111 mm. The suggested power supply rating jumps from 250 W for the A310E to 1000 W for the H200 NVL. The bus interface likewise differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for Intel, PCIe 5.0 x16 for NVIDIA.

Production status separates the two as well. The Arc A310E is marked end-of-life, with a release date of March 31, 2024, a predecessor in Xe Graphics, and a successor in Battlemage. The H200 NVL is active, released November 17, 2024, succeeding Server Ada and preceding Server Blackwell.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score in the database?

A: The NVIDIA H200 NVL scores 334,891 in Geekbench OpenCL, placing at the 100th percentile. The Intel Arc A310E has no recorded benchmarks and sits at the 50th percentile with a score of zero.

Q: How does the H200 NVL compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The NVIDIA B200 leads by 3.1% with 345,482 points, and the B300 SXM6 AC leads by 9.4% with 369,831 points. The AMD Instinct MI300X trails by 5.3% with 317,994 points, and the NVIDIA L40S trails by 13.2% with 295,763 points.

Q: Why is the memory bandwidth so different between the two?

A: The H200 NVL uses 141 GB of HBM3e on a 6144-bit bus for 4.89 TB/s bandwidth. The A310E uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus for 124.0 GB/s. The bus width difference of 96x drives the bandwidth gap.

Q: Can the Arc A310E run graphics APIs?

A: Yes, it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and has four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The H200 NVL lists N/A for all graphics APIs and has no display outputs.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The H200 NVL has 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die. The A310E has 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The H200 NVL holds about 11.1 times more transistors.

Q: Which product is still in production?

A: The H200 NVL is marked active in the database. The Arc A310E is listed as end-of-life, with a successor in Battlemage.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc A310E | NVIDIA H200 NVL |

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

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Hopper |

| Generation | Alchemist (Arc 3) | Server Hopper (Hxx) |

| Process node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 80,000 million |

| Die size | 157 mm² | 814 mm² |

| Transistor density | 45.9M / mm² | 98.3M / mm² |

| Base clock | 2000 MHz | 1365 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2000 MHz | 1785 MHz |

| Memory | 4 GB GDDR6 | 141 GB HBM3e |

| Memory clock | 1937 MHz 15.5 Gbps effective | 1593 MHz 6.4 Gbps effective |

| Bus width | 64 bit | 6144 bit |

| Bandwidth | 124.0 GB/s | 4.89 TB/s |

| Shading units | 768 | 16896 |

| TMUs | 32 | 528 |

| ROPs | 16 | 24 |

| RT cores | 6 | None listed |

| Tensor cores | None | 528 |

| Pixel rate | 32.00 GPixel/s | 42.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 64.00 GTexel/s | 942.5 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.072 TFLOPS | 60.32 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1) | 120.6 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 600 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | None | 8-pin EPS |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 1000 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | N/A |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Length | 168 mm 6.6 inches | 267 mm 10.5 inches |

| Height | 69 mm 2.7 inches | 111 mm 4.4 inches |

| Width | 20 mm 0.8 inches | Not listed |

| Production status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release date | 2024-03-31 | 2024-11-17 |

| Predecessor | Xe Graphics | Server Ada |

| Successor | Battlemage | Server Blackwell |

The Verdict

The database positions these two products at opposite ends of the GPU spectrum. The Intel Arc A310E is a low-power graphics adapter with a 75 W TDP, 4 GB of memory, and a 50th percentile standing. It supports full graphics APIs, includes display outputs, and targets rasterization workloads. Its 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth place it firmly in entry-level territory.

The NVIDIA H200 NVL is a server accelerator with a 600 W TDP, 141 GB of HBM3e, and a 100th percentile benchmark score. It has no graphics API support and no display outputs, signaling a pure compute role. Its 60.32 TFLOPS of FP32 and 4.89 TB/s bandwidth put it in a different performance class entirely, one that competes with the B200, B300 SXM6 AC, MI300X, and L40S.

The benchmark data shows the H200 NVL is 5.3% ahead of the MI300X and 13.2% ahead of the L40S, while trailing the B200 by 3.1% and the B300 SXM6 AC by 9.4%. These deltas place it among the fastest accelerators in the database. The Arc A310E has no comparable measurements, so its relative performance cannot be assessed from the recorded data.

For compute-heavy server workloads, the H200 NVL is the clear choice based on its benchmark score, memory capacity, bandwidth, and tensor core count. For graphics rendering or display output, the Arc A310E is the only one of the two that supports the necessary APIs and connectors, despite its end-of-life status. The recorded data supports a simple conclusion: these products do not overlap in function, performance, or target market.