Intel Arc A310E vs NVIDIA L20 Comparison

The Verdict

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the Intel Arc A310E. Its average benchmark score is recorded as zero, and its percentile ranking sits at 50, meaning it places in the middle of all tracked GPUs. The NVIDIA L20, by contrast, holds a percentile ranking of 99 and carries an average benchmark score of 251,147 across two recorded tests. The L20 outperforms the Arc A310E in every measurable category where both have data. The Arc A310E is marked end-of-life, while the L20 remains active in production. The data suggests the L20 is the clear choice for any workload requiring substantial compute throughput, large memory capacity, or high bandwidth. The Arc A310E, with its lower specifications and smaller footprint, fits scenarios where power draw and physical size are the primary constraints, though its lack of recorded benchmark scores limits any quantitative assessment of its real-world performance.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Arc A310E uses the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-128 chip, belonging to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. It is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 7,200 million transistors packed into a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9 million per mm². The NVIDIA L20 uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD102 chip, part of the Server Ada (Lxx) generation. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 76,300 million transistors spread across a 609 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 125.3 million per mm². The L20's die is nearly four times larger and holds more than ten times the transistor count. The density difference indicates the L20 packs more logic per area, a consequence of the smaller process node and the scale of the AD102 design.

The Arc A310E features 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 render output units, and 6 ray tracing cores. It has no tensor cores listed. The L20 features 11,776 shading units, 368 texture mapping units, 128 render output units, 92 ray tracing cores, and 368 tensor cores. These raw resource counts explain the massive gap in compute output. The Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 6.144 TFLOPS of FP16 performance at a 2:1 ratio. The L20 delivers 59.35 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 59.35 TFLOPS of FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio. The L20 offers roughly 19 times the FP32 throughput and roughly 9.7 times the FP16 throughput. The L20's FP16 capability matches its FP32, which points toward compute workloads that benefit from full-rate half-precision execution, while the Arc A310E halves its FP16 rate.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The Arc A310E uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, producing 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The L20 uses 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, producing 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The L20 carries twelve times the memory capacity and roughly seven times the bandwidth. Clock behavior also differs. The Arc A310E runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost, with memory at 1937 MHz or 15.5 Gbps effective. The L20 runs at 1440 MHz base and 2520 MHz boost, with memory at 2250 MHz or 18 Gbps effective. The L20's boost clock exceeds its base by a wide margin, while the Arc A310E shows no boost headroom. The L20's higher memory clock and wider bus combine for its bandwidth advantage.

API support is identical on paper. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Display outputs differ: the Arc A310E has four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 connectors, while the L20 has four DisplayPort 1.4a connectors. The L20's connector standard is older, but the card targets server deployments where display output is secondary.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no head-to-head benchmark entries between the Arc A310E and the L20. The L20 has two standalone benchmark scores: 274,276 in Geekbench OpenCL and 228,018 in Geekbench Vulkan. Its average benchmark score is 251,147. The Arc A310E has no benchmark scores recorded, and its average benchmark score is zero. The head-to-head wins counter shows zero wins for both cards, which confirms the absence of direct comparison data.

The L20's nearest rivals in the database provide context for its standing. The NVIDIA PG506-232 scores 225,124, which is 11.6% lower than the L20. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D scores 219,827, which is 14.2% lower. On the upper side, the NVIDIA L40 scores 284,111, which is 11.6% higher than the L20, and the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation scores 287,237, which is 12.6% higher. This places the L20 in a competitive band where it trails only the top Ada workstation cards and leads older server accelerators by a double-digit margin. The L20's percentile rank of 99 reinforces that placement, indicating it outperforms nearly all other GPUs in the database. The Arc A310E's percentile rank of 50 places it at the median of all tracked GPUs, but without benchmark scores, that rank cannot be verified against recorded measurements.

Specification Differences

Several fields differ between the two cards. The process node is 6 nm for the Arc A310E and 5 nm for the L20. Transistor count is 7,200 million versus 76,300 million. Die size is 157 mm² versus 609 mm². Transistor density is 45.9 million per mm² versus 125.3 million per mm². Base clock is 2000 MHz versus 1440 MHz. Boost clock is 2000 MHz versus 2520 MHz. Memory clock is 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). Memory size is 4 GB versus 48 GB. Memory bus width is 64 bit versus 384 bit. Memory bandwidth is 124.0 GB/s versus 864.0 GB/s. Shading units are 768 versus 11,776. TMUs are 32 versus 368. ROPs are 16 versus 128. Ray tracing cores are 6 versus 92. Tensor cores are absent on the Arc A310E and number 368 on the L20. Pixel rate is 32.00 GPixel/s versus 322.6 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 64.00 GTexel/s versus 927.4 GTexel/s. FP32 is 3.072 TFLOPS versus 59.35 TFLOPS. FP16 is 6.144 TFLOPS versus 59.35 TFLOPS. TDP is 75 W versus 275 W. Slot width is single-slot versus dual-slot. Power connectors are none versus one 16-pin. Suggested PSU is 250 W versus 600 W. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 versus four DisplayPort 1.4a. Dimensions are 168 mm by 69 mm by 20 mm versus 267 mm by 111 mm. Production status is end-of-life versus active. Release date is 2024-03-31 versus 2023-11-15. Predecessor is Xe Graphics versus Server Ampere. Successor is Battlemage versus Server Hopper.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more raw compute power?

A: The NVIDIA L20. It delivers 59.35 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS. The L20 also matches its FP32 rate in FP16 at 59.35 TFLOPS, whereas the Arc A310E reaches 6.144 TFLOPS in FP16.

Q: How do their memory capacities compare?

A: The L20 has 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, producing 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Arc A310E has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, producing 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The L20 offers twelve times the capacity and roughly seven times the bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The L20 boosts to 2520 MHz, while the Arc A310E holds a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost. The Arc A310E shows no boost headroom above its base clock.

Q: Are both cards compatible with the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Display connectors differ, with the Arc A310E using four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs and the L20 using four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: The Arc A310E is end-of-life, released on 2024-03-31, with Battlemage listed as its successor. The L20 is active, released on 2023-11-15, with Server Hopper listed as its successor.

Q: How does the L20 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The L20 scores 11.6% higher than the NVIDIA PG506-232 and 14.2% higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D. It scores 11.6% lower than the NVIDIA L40 and 12.6% lower than the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA L20 wins on every recorded performance metric. Its FP32 throughput of 59.35 TFLOPS dwarfs the Arc A310E's 3.072 TFLOPS. Its FP16 rate of 59.35 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio indicates it can handle half-precision workloads without a speed penalty, whereas the Arc A310E's FP16 rate of 6.144 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio means half-precision costs half the rate. The L20's 48 GB memory capacity and 864.0 GB/s bandwidth support large datasets and high-throughput data movement, while the Arc A310E's 4 GB and 124.0 GB/s limit working sets and data flow. The L20's 368 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for tensor operations, a feature entirely absent from the Arc A310E. The L20's 92 ray tracing cores outnumber the Arc A310E's 6 by a wide margin, suggesting stronger ray tracing throughput if that workload scales with core count.

The Arc A310E wins on power and physical footprint. Its 75 W TDP is 200 W lower than the L20's 275 W. Its suggested PSU of 250 W is 350 W lower than the L20's 600 W. It draws power without any external connectors, while the L20 requires a single 16-pin connector. The Arc A310E occupies a single slot and measures 168 mm by 69 mm by 20 mm, while the L20 occupies two slots and measures 267 mm by 111 mm. The Arc A310E's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface is narrower than the L20's PCIe 4.0 x16, which matters for bandwidth-sensitive tasks that rely on host communication. The Arc A310E also uses newer DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the L20 ships with DisplayPort 1.4a.

The data implies a stark division of roles. The L20 targets compute-heavy environments where memory capacity, tensor throughput, and raw FP32 or FP16 performance dominate. The Arc A310E targets low-power, space-constrained systems where a single-slot, connector-free card with modest power demands is preferable. The Arc A310E's lack of recorded benchmark scores leaves its practical performance unverified in the database, so any assessment of its compute capability rests on its specification sheet rather than measured results. The L20's recorded scores and its position among rivals give it a verified performance profile. The L20 leads the PG506-232 and Radeon PRO W7900D by double digits and trails only the L40 and RTX 6000 Ada Generation by similar margins. The Arc A310E, at the 50th percentile with zero average score, has no comparable reference points in the database.