Intel Arc A310E vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc A310E and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation. However, the database does include benchmark scores for the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, while the Arc A310E has no entries in its benchmark array. This absence of comparable measurements means a direct numeric comparison of application performance cannot be established from the available records.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation posts an average benchmark score of 117,088 across its two recorded tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 124,812, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 109,364. The Arc A310E has an average benchmark score of 0 with no recorded tests, placing it at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation sits at the 95th percentile, a substantial gap that reflects the absence of measurable performance data for the Intel part.

Relative to its nearest rivals, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation trails the NVIDIA GB10 by 0.3%, sits 1.6% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W7700, and leads the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 2.4% and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile by 2.8%. These margins are narrow, indicating that the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation occupies a competitive performance tier, whereas the Arc A310E's lack of recorded scores leaves it unranked against any comparable hardware.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural lineages. The Intel Arc A310E uses the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, and belongs to the Alchemist generation within the Arc 3 product family. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD104 chip, and it belongs to the GeForce 40-series lineup, though it is classified as a Workstation Ada product.

Manufacturing processes differ notably. Both use TSMC as the foundry, but the Arc A310E is built on a 6 nm process, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses a 5 nm process. The transistor counts diverge sharply: the Intel chip carries 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9 million per mm². The NVIDIA chip packs 35,800 million transistors onto a 294 mm² die, achieving a density of 121.8 million per mm². The Ada Lovelace die is therefore roughly 87% larger in area while containing nearly five times as many transistors.

The shading and compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The Arc A310E has 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Ray tracing hardware also scales: the Intel part has 6 RT cores, while the NVIDIA part has 48. Additionally, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation includes 192 tensor cores, a feature entirely absent from the Arc A310E's specification sheet.

Clock behavior shows an interesting contrast. The Arc A310E runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost clocks, with no dynamic range. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a base clock of 720 MHz and a boost clock of 1560 MHz, indicating a wider frequency envelope and lower idle or low-load operation. Memory clocks also differ: the Arc A310E uses 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective. Despite the lower memory clock, the NVIDIA card delivers more bandwidth due to its wider bus.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has 280.0 GB/s of bandwidth, more than double the Arc A310E's 124.0 GB/s. This comes from a 160-bit memory bus versus the Intel part's 64-bit bus, despite both using GDDR6 memory.

Q: How do the FP32 compute performances compare?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation delivers 19.17 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, roughly 6.2 times the Arc A310E's 3.072 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA card also maintains a 1:1 FP16 ratio at 19.17 TFLOPS, whereas the Intel part achieves 6.144 TFLOPS FP16 through a 2:1 rate.

Q: What are the physical dimensions of each card?

A: Both cards share identical length and height: 168 mm (6.6 inches) in length and 69 mm (2.7 inches) in height. The Arc A310E has a specified width of 20 mm (0.8 inches) and is single-slot, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has no recorded width and occupies a dual-slot form factor.

Q: What display outputs do they provide?

A: Both cards offer four mini-DisplayPort connections. The Arc A310E uses mini-DisplayPort 2.0, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The Arc A310E is marked as end-of-life, with a release date of March 31, 2024. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation remains active in production, with an earlier release date of March 20, 2023.

Q: Do both cards support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both list DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 in their API specifications. The API feature sets are identical in the recorded data.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs in the database:

| Specification | Intel Arc A310E | NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation |

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

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Ada Lovelace |

| Chip | DG2-128 | AD104 |

| Generation | Alchemist (Arc 3) | Workstation Ada |

| Process node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 35,800 million |

| Die size | 157 mm² | 294 mm² |

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

| Base clock | 2000 MHz | 720 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2000 MHz | 1560 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1937 MHz, 15.5 Gbps effective | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 4 GB | 20 GB |

| Memory bus width | 64 bit | 160 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 124.0 GB/s | 280.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 768 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 32 | 192 |

| ROPs | 16 | 64 |

| RT cores | 6 | 48 |

| Tensor cores | None | 192 |

| Pixel rate | 32.00 GPixel/s | 99.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 64.00 GTexel/s | 299.5 GTexel/s |

| FP32 performance | 3.072 TFLOPS | 19.17 TFLOPS |

| FP16 performance | 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1) | 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 70 W |

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

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

| Display outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

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

| Predecessor | Xe Graphics | Workstation Ampere |

| Successor | Battlemage | Blackwell PRO W |

Fields that match include the manufacturer's foundry (TSMC), memory type (GDDR6), power connector requirement (none), suggested PSU (250 W), API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4), and physical length and height.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation dominates on nearly every measurable compute metric. Its FP32 throughput of 19.17 TFLOPS is 6.2 times higher than the Arc A310E's 3.072 TFLOPS. Texture rate reaches 299.5 GTexel/s versus 64.00 GTexel/s, a 4.7 times advantage. Pixel rate comes in at 99.84 GPixel/s against the Intel part's 32.00 GPixel/s, a 3.1 times margin. Memory bandwidth of 280.0 GB/s is 2.3 times the Arc A310E's 124.0 GB/s, and memory capacity of 20 GB is five times the 4 GB available on the Intel card.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation also carries 192 tensor cores, enabling hardware acceleration for workloads that rely on tensor operations, a capability the Arc A310E lacks entirely. Its 48 RT cores versus 6 provide substantially more ray tracing throughput. The wider PCIe 4.0 x16 interface doubles the bus bandwidth available to the NVIDIA part compared to the Arc's x8 link.

The Arc A310E does hold advantages in a few specific areas. Its base and boost clocks are both 2000 MHz, 280 MHz higher than the NVIDIA card's boost clock of 1560 MHz. This higher clock rate does not translate into overall performance superiority given the massive difference in shading unit count, but it does indicate a more aggressively clocked design. The Arc A310E also uses the newer DisplayPort 2.0 standard, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is limited to DisplayPort 1.4a. The Intel card's single-slot form factor with a 20 mm width makes it physically thinner than the NVIDIA dual-slot design, though both share identical length and height. The Arc A310E has a slightly higher TDP at 75 W versus 70 W, but neither card requires external power connectors, and both suggest a 250 W power supply.

In terms of production lifecycle, the Arc A310E is end-of-life with a successor named as Battlemage, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation remains active with a successor identified as Blackwell PRO W.

The Verdict

The recorded data makes the performance hierarchy clear. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the superior compute platform by every recorded performance metric, with 6.2 times the FP32 throughput, 4.7 times the texture rate, 3.1 times the pixel rate, 2.3 times the memory bandwidth, and five times the memory capacity. Its 95th percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database, supported by an average benchmark score of 117,088, places it in the upper tier of available hardware. The Arc A310E's 50th percentile ranking with no recorded benchmark scores leaves it without substantiated performance credentials.

Users requiring large memory capacity for data-intensive workloads should select the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, as its 20 GB GDDR6 frame buffer is unmatched by the Arc A310E's 4 GB. Users leveraging tensor operations for machine learning or AI acceleration must choose the NVIDIA card, as the Arc A310E has no tensor cores. Ray tracing workloads similarly favor the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, which provides 48 RT cores versus 6.

The Arc A310E is positioned for environments where its physical profile matters. Its single-slot width of 20 mm and identical 168 mm length to the NVIDIA card make it a thinner option for constrained chassis. The DisplayPort 2.0 outputs offer a newer display interface standard. Its 2000 MHz flat clock design is notable for consistency, and its lower shading unit count suggests it targets basic graphics output rather than compute-heavy tasks. However, with an end-of-life production status and no benchmark data, the Arc A310E cannot be recommended for performance-critical deployments based on the available evidence.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the only one of the two with recorded benchmark results, and those results place it within 1.6% of the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 and within 0.3% of the NVIDIA GB10, while leading the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 2.4% and the RTX A5500 Mobile by 2.8%. These competitive margins confirm its standing in the workstation segment. The Arc A310E, by contrast, has no rivals listed in the database, reflecting its lack of measurable performance data. For any workload where compute throughput, memory capacity, or feature set matters, the data points exclusively to the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation.