Intel Arc A310E vs NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the Intel Arc A310E or the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero, and the head-to-head benchmark list is empty. Consequently, there are no measured performance deltas, no percentile comparisons against other GPUs, and no wins recorded for either part. The data confirms both products sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, but this percentile is derived from their position in the catalog, not from any actual test results.

What can be compared directly is the theoretical compute and memory throughput derived from their specifications. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 15.62 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is roughly five times the 3.072 TFLOPS of the Arc A310E. In FP16 workloads, the NVIDIA part maintains the same 15.62 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part reaches 6.144 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio. Texture rate shows a similar gap: 244.1 GTexel/s for the RTX 3000 versus 64.00 GTexel/s for the Arc A310E. Pixel rate favors the NVIDIA part as well, with 81.36 GPixel/s against 32.00 GPixel/s.

Memory bandwidth heavily favors the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation. The NVIDIA GPU uses an 8 GB GDDR6 configuration on a 128-bit bus, producing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc A310E uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 124.0 GB/s. That is slightly more than half the bandwidth of the NVIDIA part. Clock speeds differ substantially: the Arc A310E runs at a fixed 2000 MHz for both base and boost, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada operates at 1395 MHz base and 1695 MHz boost. The Intel part has a higher clock, but the NVIDIA part compensates with far more execution units.

Where Each One Wins

Without benchmark results, wins must be inferred from architectural capacity. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation wins in every raw throughput category recorded in the database. It has 4608 shading units versus 768, 144 texture mapping units versus 32, 48 render output units versus 16, 36 ray tracing cores versus 6, and 144 tensor cores where the Intel part has none. For any workload that scales with shader count, texture throughput, or ray tracing hardware, the NVIDIA part is the clear choice based on specification alone.

The Intel Arc A310E wins in efficiency-oriented metrics. Its 75 W TDP is substantially lower than the 115 W TDP of the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation. The Arc A310E also runs at a higher base and boost clock of 2000 MHz, which can help latency-sensitive tasks that do not fully utilize the wider execution resources of the NVIDIA part. The Intel GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the NVIDIA part uses PCIe 4.0 x16, giving the RTX 3000 twice the bus bandwidth for data transfer between GPU and host.

The Arc A310E offers four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, making it suitable for multi-monitor setups with modern display connectivity. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation lists "Portable Device Dependent" for display outputs, meaning its display capabilities depend entirely on the laptop or mobile workstation it is installed in. For fixed desktop or embedded systems requiring multiple high-bandwidth display connections, the Intel part has a structural advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The Intel Arc A310E uses the DG2-128 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. It is manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. Transistor density is 45.9 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation uses the AD106 chip based on Ada Lovelace architecture, from the Ada-MW generation. It is built on a 5 nm TSMC process with 22,900 million transistors on a 188 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 121.8 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip packs more than three times the transistors into a slightly larger die, reflecting a denser and more recent manufacturing process.

The Intel part is a discrete GPU, single-slot, 168 mm long, 69 mm high, and 20 mm wide, with no power connectors required. The NVIDIA part is an integrated graphics processor (IGP), meaning it is designed for mobile platforms and has no dimensions listed in the database. The Arc A310E draws power entirely from its slot, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada is integrated into a laptop motherboard.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The Arc A310E uses a 64-bit memory bus with 4 GB of GDDR6, while the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada uses a 128-bit bus with 8 GB of GDDR6. The NVIDIA part also has a higher effective memory clock: 16 Gbps effective versus 15.5 Gbps effective for the Intel part. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical in the recorded data.

The Intel part has no tensor cores, while the NVIDIA part includes 144 tensor cores. For ray tracing, the NVIDIA part has 36 RT cores versus 6 on the Intel part. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning full-rate half-precision compute, while the Intel part runs FP16 at half rate with a 2:1 ratio. The NVIDIA GPU has a production status of "Active," while the Intel Arc A310E is marked "End-of-life," with Battlemage listed as its successor. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada's successor is Blackwell-MW.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear hierarchy. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation dominates the Intel Arc A310E in every measured compute and memory specification recorded in the database. It has six times the shading units, more than four times the texture units, three times the render outputs, six times the ray tracing cores, and double the memory capacity and bandwidth. Its FP32 throughput of 15.62 TFLOPS is more than five times the 3.072 TFLOPS of the Intel part. For any workload that can use these resources, the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada is the stronger GPU.

The Intel Arc A310E is the lower-power, lower-complexity option. Its 75 W TDP versus 115 W makes it suitable for systems with tighter thermal and power budgets. Its fixed 2000 MHz clock is higher than the NVIDIA part's boost clock, which could benefit lightly threaded or latency-bound tasks. The four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs give it a connectivity advantage for multi-display desktop or embedded configurations. However, the database contains no benchmark scores to validate real-world performance in either direction.

The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation is a mobile-only part, integrated into laptops and portable workstations. The Arc A310E is a discrete, single-slot card that can be installed in a standard PCIe slot. These are different deployment models. For a laptop or mobile workstation, the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada is the obvious choice from the recorded specifications. For a compact desktop or embedded system with a PCIe x8 slot and minimal power delivery, the Arc A310E fits where a 115 W mobile GPU cannot.

Given the lack of benchmark data, the verdict rests entirely on specifications. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation is the higher-performance part by a substantial margin in every compute category. The Arc A310E is the lower-power, more flexible display option. Neither part has measured scores in the database, so any purchase decision should be based on the architectural differences and system requirements described above.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 15.62 TFLOPS FP32, compared to 3.072 TFLOPS for the Intel Arc A310E.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has a 75 W TDP and requires no power connectors, with a suggested power supply of 250 W. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation has a 115 W TDP and no power connectors, as it is an integrated mobile GPU.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A310E have tensor cores?

A: No, the Arc A310E has no tensor cores. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation includes 144 tensor cores.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: Both GPUs support ray tracing, but with different hardware counts. The Intel Arc A310E has 6 ray tracing cores, while the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation has 36 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc A310E is marked as end-of-life, with Battlemage as its successor. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation is active, with Blackwell-MW listed as its successor.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc A310E | NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation |

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

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Ada Lovelace |

| Process node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 22,900 million |

| Die size | 157 mm² | 188 mm² |

| Transistor density | 45.9M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base clock | 2000 MHz | 1395 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2000 MHz | 1695 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1937 MHz, 15.5 Gbps effective | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus width | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 124.0 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 768 | 4608 |

| TMUs | 32 | 144 |

| ROPs | 16 | 48 |

| Ray tracing cores | 6 | 36 |

| Tensor cores | None | 144 |

| Pixel rate | 32.00 GPixel/s | 81.36 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 64.00 GTexel/s | 244.1 GTexel/s |

| FP32 performance | 3.072 TFLOPS | 15.62 TFLOPS |

| FP16 performance | 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1) | 15.62 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 115 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | IGP |

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

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

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

| Release date | 2024-03-31 | 2023-03-20 |

| Predecessor | Xe Graphics | Ampere-MW |

| Successor | Battlemage | Blackwell-MW |