Intel Arc A310E vs NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for the Intel Arc A310E and the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero, and the wins counters for each side are set to zero. This absence of direct measurement data means the comparison must be built entirely from the architectural and specification records held in the database.

The raw compute figures illustrate the scale of the gap. The RTX 5000 Embedded Ada delivers 32.69 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS. That places the NVIDIA part at approximately 10.6 times the FP32 throughput of the Intel part. In FP16, the NVIDIA card again delivers 32.69 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, whereas the Intel card delivers 6.144 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, putting the NVIDIA part at roughly 5.3 times the FP16 throughput.

Texture and pixel throughput follow the same pattern. The RTX 5000 Embedded Ada reaches 510.7 GTexel/s, compared to 64.00 GTexel/s for the Arc A310E, a margin of about 8 times. Pixel rate stands at 188.2 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA part versus 32.00 GPixel/s for the Intel part, a factor of roughly 5.9.

Memory bandwidth is another decisive split. The NVIDIA card uses a 256-bit bus with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and reaches 576.0 GB/s. The Intel card uses a 64-bit bus with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory and reaches 124.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA bandwidth advantage is approximately 4.6 times.

Clock behavior differs notably. The Intel chip runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost, while the NVIDIA chip has a base of 930 MHz and a boost of 1680 MHz. The Intel part sustains a higher constant frequency, but the NVIDIA part combines a lower idle clock with a substantial boost ceiling, and its massive shading unit count more than compensates for the lower peak frequency.

The transistor and die records add context. The NVIDIA AD103 chip contains 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, produced on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel DG2-128 contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, produced on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The transistor density figures are 121.1M per mm² for NVIDIA and 45.9M per mm² for Intel, showing the NVIDIA design packs nearly 2.6 times more transistors per square millimeter.

Both parts support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level feature parity exists. The RTX 5000 Embedded Ada also carries 304 tensor cores and 76 RT cores, while the Arc A310E has 6 RT cores and no tensor core count listed. The NVIDIA card has 9728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, against 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs for the Intel card.

Where Each One Wins

Without direct benchmark scores, the wins must be inferred from the recorded capabilities.

The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 wins in every raw performance category where the database holds figures. FP32 compute, FP16 compute, texture rate, pixel rate, memory capacity, memory bus width, memory bandwidth, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, RT cores, and tensor cores are all higher on the NVIDIA side. This makes it the clear choice for workloads that scale with parallel throughput, such as large-scale rendering, high-resolution texture work, or compute-heavy simulation tasks.

The Intel Arc A310E wins in the categories of power draw and physical footprint. Its TDP is recorded at 75 W, exactly half of the NVIDIA part's 150 W. The Intel card is a single-slot design measuring 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, with no power connectors required and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The NVIDIA part is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no dimensions recorded, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU, making it dependent on the host device's cooling and power delivery. For systems constrained by thermal envelope or physical space, the Intel part is the lower-demand option.

The Intel card also holds a clock advantage. Its 2000 MHz base and boost clocks are higher than the NVIDIA part's 930 MHz base and 1680 MHz boost. In workloads that are sensitive to raw clock speed rather than parallel throughput, this could narrow the gap, though the NVIDIA part's 9728 shading units versus 768 shading units means the Intel clock advantage is unlikely to translate into a practical win in most compute scenarios.

The Intel part also wins on release timing in one sense: it was released on 2024-03-31, while the NVIDIA part was released on 2023-03-20. The NVIDIA part has been available longer, while the Intel part is newer. However, the Intel part is marked as end-of-life, while the NVIDIA part is marked as active production.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies.

The Intel Arc A310E uses the DG2-128 chip based on the Xe-HPG architecture, belonging to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. It is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 157 mm² and 7,200 million transistors. The architecture uses a 2:1 ratio for FP16 to FP32, meaning FP16 throughput is double that of FP32, a design choice that favors mixed-precision workloads with a lighter power footprint.

The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 uses the AD103 chip based on the Ada Lovelace architecture, belonging to the Ada-MW generation and the GeForce 50-series family. It is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 379 mm² and 45,900 million transistors. The FP16 to FP32 ratio is 1:1, meaning the card delivers identical throughput for both precisions, a design that avoids any precision-based penalty.

The memory subsystems diverge sharply. The Intel card has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, reaching 124.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, reaching 576.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card offers four times the capacity and roughly 4.6 times the bandwidth.

The RT core counts differ by an order of magnitude. The Intel card has 6 RT cores, while the NVIDIA card has 76 RT cores. The NVIDIA card also includes 304 tensor cores, a feature category with no recorded equivalent on the Intel card. These differences directly affect ray tracing and AI-accelerated workloads. The NVIDIA card's 304 TMUs and 112 ROPs versus the Intel card's 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs further indicate a much wider rendering pipeline.

The bus interface also differs. The Intel card uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the NVIDIA card uses PCIe 4.0 x16. This doubles the available host interface bandwidth for the NVIDIA part, which matters for data transfer in embedded or workstation scenarios.

Display outputs are another differentiator. The Intel card provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0, which supports modern display connectivity. The NVIDIA card's outputs are listed as portable device dependent, meaning they vary by the host system rather than being fixed on the card itself.

Power delivery records show the Intel card has no power connectors and a 75 W TDP, while the NVIDIA card also has no power connectors but a 150 W TDP. The Intel card's suggested PSU is 250 W, while the NVIDIA card has no suggested PSU listed, reflecting its embedded IGP nature where the host device supplies power.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 delivers 32.69 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to 3.072 TFLOPS for the Intel Arc A310E.

Q: How much memory does each card have and what is the bandwidth?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has a TDP of 75 W, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 has a TDP of 150 W and no power connectors, with no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Do both cards support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the die size and transistor count for each chip?

A: The Intel DG2-128 chip measures 157 mm² with 7,200 million transistors on a 6 nm process. The NVIDIA AD103 chip measures 379 mm² with 45,900 million transistors on a 5 nm process.

Q: Which card has more RT cores and does either have tensor cores?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has 6 RT cores and no listed tensor cores. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 has 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores.

The Verdict

The data in the database points to two very different products with distinct intended roles.

The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 is the dominant performer in every measurable compute category. Its 32.69 TFLOPS FP32, 510.7 GTexel/s texture rate, 188.2 GPixel/s pixel rate, 576.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 16 GB memory capacity place it in a different performance class entirely. The 9728 shading units, 304 TMUs, 112 ROPs, 76 RT cores, and 304 tensor cores give it the architectural width to handle large parallel workloads, ray tracing, and AI inference tasks. Its 150 W TDP and IGP form factor indicate it is designed to be integrated into a host device that can provide adequate cooling and power delivery.

The Intel Arc A310E is the lower-power, smaller-footprint option. Its 75 W TDP, single-slot design, 168 mm length, 69 mm height, and 20 mm width, along with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU, make it suitable for compact systems. Its 4 GB memory and 64-bit bus limit its memory-bound performance, and its 768 shading units and 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 place it at a fraction of the NVIDIA part's throughput. The flat 2000 MHz clock is a point in its favor for latency-sensitive tasks, but the overall compute capacity is far lower.

The production status also matters. The Intel part is end-of-life, with the successor listed as Battlemage. The NVIDIA part is active, with the predecessor listed as Ampere-MW and the successor as Blackwell-MW. This means the Intel part is no longer in production, while the NVIDIA part is still current.

For any workload that depends on raw throughput, memory capacity, or bandwidth, the recorded data clearly favors the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2. For systems where power draw and physical dimensions are the primary constraints, the Intel Arc A310E offers a lower-demand alternative, but it cannot match the NVIDIA part's performance envelope. The absence of direct benchmark scores means these conclusions rest on the architectural and specification records, but those records are unambiguous about the performance hierarchy.