Intel Arc A310E vs NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A310E and NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB occupy entirely different segments of the GPU landscape. The database shows zero head-to-head benchmark entries between them, which itself is informative: these two products were never designed to compete in the same workload space. The Arc A310E is a compact, low-power graphics card aimed at embedded or entry-level visual tasks, while the H200 SXM is a massive server accelerator built for high-throughput compute environments.

Looking at the recorded specifications, the Arc A310E claims wins in areas related to display output and API support for graphics workloads. It offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, whereas the H200 SXM provides no display outputs at all. The Arc A310E also carries DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, while the H200 SXM lists N/A across all three graphics APIs. For any task requiring a rendered frame to appear on a screen, the Arc A310E is the only one of the two that can do so directly.

The H200 SXM dominates every raw compute metric recorded in the database. Its FP32 throughput reaches 66.91 TFLOPS, its FP16 reaches 133.8 TFLOPS (2:1), and its memory bandwidth hits 4.89 TB/s. The Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS FP32, 6.144 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The H200 also carries 528 tensor cores, a feature class entirely absent from the Arc A310E's specification sheet. The database records the H200 with 16896 shading units, 528 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, versus 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs on the Arc.

The production status field also splits the two clearly. The Arc A310E is marked end-of-life, while the H200 SXM remains active. The Arc's predecessor is listed as Xe Graphics and its successor as Battlemage, indicating a consumer-oriented lineage. The H200's predecessor is Server Ada and its successor is Server Blackwell, confirming its data-center trajectory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for these two products, and neither product has any individual benchmark entries recorded. Both carry an identical percentile rank of 50 against all GPUs, and both show an average benchmark score of 0. This absence of measured data means a numerical comparison of actual performance deltas cannot be made from the record.

What can be compared directly is the theoretical throughput data. In FP32 compute, the H200 SXM's 66.91 TFLOPS is roughly 21.8 times the Arc A310E's 3.072 TFLOPS. In FP16, the H200's 133.8 TFLOPS is roughly 21.8 times the Arc's 6.144 TFLOPS. The pixel rate gap is smaller: the H200 records 47.52 GPixel/s versus 32.00 GPixel/s for the Arc, a factor of about 1.5. Texture rate tells a different story entirely: the H200's 1,045.4 GTexel/s is more than 16 times the Arc's 64.00 GTexel/s, driven by the H200's 528 TMUs against 32.

Memory bandwidth is where the separation becomes extreme. The H200 SXM's 4.89 TB/s is roughly 39.4 times the Arc A310E's 124.0 GB/s. The H200 uses a 6144-bit memory bus with HBM3e, while the Arc uses a 64-bit bus with GDDR6. The memory capacity gap is equally stark: 141 GB versus 4 GB. Clock speeds do not favor the larger card in every field, however. The Arc A310E runs a base and boost of 2000 MHz, while the H200 runs 1500 MHz base and 1980 MHz boost. The Arc's memory clock is 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective), higher than the H200's 1593 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective). The H200 compensates with an enormous bus width and a different memory technology.

Architecture Differences

The Arc A310E uses the DG2-128 chip based on Intel's Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. It is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The H200 SXM uses the GH100 chip based on NVIDIA's Hopper architecture, part of the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation. It is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC with 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 98.3M per mm². The H200 packs over 11 times the transistor count onto a die roughly 5.2 times larger, and its density advantage is substantial.

The ray tracing configuration differs as well. The Arc A310E lists 6 RT cores, while the H200 SXM lists no RT cores at all. Instead, the H200 carries 528 tensor cores, a type of hardware unit the Arc does not list. The Arc supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4; the H200 lists N/A for all three graphics APIs, reflecting its compute-first design with no display pipeline.

Form factor and power delivery separate the two products sharply. The Arc A310E is a single-slot, 168 mm long card with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The H200 SXM is an SXM module with an 8-pin EPS power connector and a suggested PSU of 1100 W. Their bus interfaces differ too: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the Arc, PCIe 5.0 x16 for the H200. The Arc's TDP is 75 W; the H200's TDP is 700 W.

The release timeline places the Arc A310E first, with a launch date of 2024-03-31, while the H200 SXM followed on 2024-11-17. The Arc is already end-of-life, while the H200 remains active. The Arc's predecessor is Xe Graphics and its successor is Battlemage. The H200's predecessor is Server Ada and its successor is Server Blackwell.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB records 66.91 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc A310E records 3.072 TFLOPS. The H200 holds a roughly 21.8 times advantage in this metric.

Q: Does the Arc A310E support display outputs?

A: Yes, the Arc A310E provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The H200 SXM lists no display outputs at all.

Q: How do the memory capacities compare?

A: The H200 SXM has 141 GB of HBM3e memory on a 6144-bit bus, while the Arc A310E has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus. The H200's bandwidth is 4.89 TB/s versus 124.0 GB/s for the Arc.

Q: Which GPU includes tensor cores?

A: The H200 SXM lists 528 tensor cores. The Arc A310E does not list tensor cores in its specification. The Arc does list 6 RT cores, while the H200 lists none.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Arc A310E has a TDP of 75 W with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The H200 SXM has a TDP of 700 W with an 8-pin EPS connector and a suggested PSU of 1100 W.

Q: Are both GPUs currently in production?

A: No. The Arc A310E is marked end-of-life, while the H200 SXM is marked active.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc A310E | NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB |

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

| Chip | DG2-128 | GH100 |

| 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 | 1500 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2000 MHz | 1980 MHz |

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

| Memory size | 4 GB | 141 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | HBM3e |

| Memory bus width | 64 bit | 6144 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 124.0 GB/s | 4.89 TB/s |

| Shading units | 768 | 16896 |

| TMUs | 32 | 528 |

| ROPs | 16 | 24 |

| RT cores | 6 | null |

| Tensor cores | null | 528 |

| Pixel rate | 32.00 GPixel/s | 47.52 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 64.00 GTexel/s | 1,045.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.072 TFLOPS | 66.91 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1) | 133.8 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 700 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | SXM Module |

| Power connectors | None | 8-pin EPS |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 1100 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 |

| Dimensions | 168 mm 6.6 inches length, 69 mm 2.7 inches height, 20 mm 0.8 inches width | null |

| 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 data describes two products with no meaningful overlap in purpose. The Intel Arc A310E is a 75 W, single-slot card with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, and full support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. It carries 6 RT cores and a 64-bit memory bus. The NVIDIA H200 SXM is a 700 W SXM module with 141 GB of HBM3e memory on a 6144-bit bus, 528 tensor cores, no display outputs, and no graphics API support. Its FP32 throughput is 66.91 TFLOPS, its FP16 throughput is 133.8 TFLOPS, and its memory bandwidth reaches 4.89 TB/s.

For workloads that require rendering, display output, or graphics API compatibility, the Arc A310E is the only option between the two that provides those capabilities. For compute-heavy tasks, particularly those that can use tensor cores or require large memory capacity and bandwidth, the H200 SXM holds every recorded advantage. The Arc is end-of-life; the H200 is active. The database shows no benchmark interactions between them, which is consistent with their separate design targets. The choice follows the workload: visual and client-side graphics point to the Arc A310E, large-scale server compute points to the H200 SXM.