Intel Arc A310E vs NVIDIA RTX 6000D Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core specifications of the Intel Arc A310E?

A: The Intel Arc A310E is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, using a 6 nm process from TSMC. It contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die and features 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 ray tracing cores. It has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the core specifications of the NVIDIA RTX 6000D?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 6000D uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB202 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die. The GPU includes 19,968 shading units, 624 TMUs, 192 ROPs, 156 ray tracing cores, and 624 tensor cores. Memory is 84 GB of GDDR7 on a 448-bit bus, delivering 1.40 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in terms of FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 6000D delivers 97.04 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is substantially higher than the Intel Arc A310E's 3.072 TFLOPS. This represents a massive gap in raw compute throughput, approximately 31 times higher for the NVIDIA part.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption between the two cards?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has a TDP of 75 W and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The NVIDIA RTX 6000D has a TDP of 600 W, uses a single 16-pin power connector, and requires a suggested 1000 W PSU.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc A310E is listed as end-of-life, having been released on 2024-03-31, with its predecessor being Xe Graphics and its successor being Battlemage. The NVIDIA RTX 6000D is currently active, released on 2025-07-13, with its predecessor being Workstation Ada and no successor listed.

Q: How does the RTX 6000D rank among all GPUs in the database?

A: The RTX 6000D sits in the 98th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 195,964. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB, scores 194,415, which is only 0.8% lower. The RTX 6000D is 4.7% ahead of the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB and 6.1% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent completely different architectural generations and market positions. The Intel Arc A310E uses the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, which is part of the Alchemist generation within the Arc 3 series. This is a 6 nm TSMC design with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 45.9 million per square millimeter. The architecture targets efficiency and low power draw, which is reflected in its 75 W TDP and lack of external power connectors.

The NVIDIA RTX 6000D, by contrast, uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB202 chip, part of the Blackwell PRO W generation and the GeForce 60-series family. It is fabricated on a 5 nm TSMC process and contains 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 122.9 million per square millimeter. This is a much larger and more complex chip, designed for professional workstation workloads with substantial compute and memory resources.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The Arc A310E uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 6000D uses 84 GB of GDDR7 on a 448-bit bus, yielding 1.40 TB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock for the Intel card is 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective), while the NVIDIA card runs at 1560 MHz (25 Gbps effective).

The shading resources scale dramatically. The Arc A310E has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with 6 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The RTX 6000D has 19,968 shading units, 624 TMUs, and 192 ROPs, with 156 ray tracing cores and 624 tensor cores. The difference in pixel throughput is 32.00 GPixel/s for Intel versus 466.6 GPixel/s for NVIDIA, and texture throughput is 64.00 GTexel/s versus 1,516.3 GTexel/s.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Arc A310E uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the RTX 6000D uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs are 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 for Intel and 4x DisplayPort 2.1b for NVIDIA. Physical dimensions differ substantially: the Intel card measures 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, while the NVIDIA card measures 304 mm, 137 mm, and 40 mm respectively.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc A310E and the NVIDIA RTX 6000D. However, the recorded data for the RTX 6000D provides a clear picture of its performance tier. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RTX 6000D scores 3,522. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 388,405. The Arc A310E has no benchmark entries in the database, and its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, placing it in the 50th percentile of all GPUs.

The RTX 6000D's average benchmark score of 195,964 places it in the 98th percentile. Its nearest rivals confirm its positioning. The Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB scores 194,415, which is 0.8% lower. The A100 SXM4 40 GB scores 187,147, 4.7% lower. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation scores 184,664, 6.1% lower. The only rival in the recorded set that beats it is the A100 PCIe 80 GB, scoring 207,124, which is 5.4% higher.

The compute throughput comparison is stark. The RTX 6000D delivers 97.04 TFLOPS FP32, while the Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS. For FP16, the NVIDIA card again delivers 97.04 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel card delivers 6.144 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. The NVIDIA card's FP16 output is 15.8 times higher than the Intel card's.

Pixel and texture rates tell a similar story. The RTX 6000D's 466.6 GPixel/s is roughly 14.6 times the Arc A310E's 32.00 GPixel/s. The texture rate of 1,516.3 GTexel/s is approximately 23.7 times the Intel card's 64.00 GTexel/s. These ratios are consistent with the massive difference in shading units, TMUs, and ROPs.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The Intel Arc A310E is a 6 nm part with 7,200 million transistors, while the NVIDIA RTX 6000D is a 5 nm part with 92,200 million transistors. Die size is 157 mm² for Intel versus 750 mm² for NVIDIA. Transistor density is 45.9 million per mm² versus 122.9 million per mm².

Clock speeds differ in both base and boost. The Arc A310E runs at 2000 MHz for both base and boost, while the RTX 6000D has a 1992 MHz base clock and a 2430 MHz boost clock. Memory clocks are 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) for Intel and 1560 MHz (25 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

Memory configuration is completely different: 4 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth for Intel, versus 84 GB GDDR7 on a 448-bit bus with 1.40 TB/s bandwidth for NVIDIA. The compute resources scale from 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs on Intel to 19,968 shading units, 624 TMUs, and 192 ROPs on NVIDIA. Ray tracing cores are 6 versus 156, and tensor cores are absent on Intel versus 624 on NVIDIA.

Power and physical specifications diverge. The Arc A310E has a 75 W TDP, is single-slot, uses no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. The RTX 6000D has a 600 W TDP, is dual-slot, uses one 16-pin connector, and suggests a 1000 W PSU. The Intel card is 168 mm long, 69 mm tall, and 20 mm wide. The NVIDIA card is 304 mm long, 137 mm tall, and 40 mm wide.

Bus interfaces differ: PCIe 4.0 x8 for Intel versus PCIe 5.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 versus 4x DisplayPort 2.1b. Production status is end-of-life for Intel and active for NVIDIA. The release dates are 2024-03-31 for Intel and 2025-07-13 for NVIDIA. The Arc A310E has no launch MSRP recorded, while the RTX 6000D has a launch MSRP of 8,565 USD.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A310E wins on power efficiency and physical footprint. Its 75 W TDP requires no external power connectors and only a 250 W suggested PSU, making it suitable for compact systems where power delivery and cooling are constrained. The single-slot design at 168 mm length, 69 mm height, and 20 mm width allows installation in small form factor chassis. Its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs support basic multi-display configurations.

The Arc A310E also holds advantages in its production timeline and ecosystem positioning. It was released on 2024-03-31, earlier than the RTX 6000D's 2025-07-13 release. Its predecessor is Xe Graphics and its successor is Battlemage, indicating an established product cycle. The 6 nm process and 7,200 million transistor count on a 157 mm² die make it a low-complexity part relative to the NVIDIA flagship.

The NVIDIA RTX 6000D wins decisively on performance across every compute metric. Its 97.04 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 output, 1.40 TB/s memory bandwidth, and 84 GB GDDR7 capacity position it for large-scale professional workloads. The 624 tensor cores and 156 ray tracing cores enable accelerated AI and ray tracing tasks that the Arc A310E cannot approach.

The RTX 6000D's benchmark positioning confirms its dominance. With an average score of 195,964 and a 98th percentile ranking, it sits among the fastest GPUs in the database. Its nearest rival, the Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB, trails by 0.8%, and it leads the A100 SXM4 40 GB by 4.7% and the RTX 5000 Ada Generation by 6.1%. The only recorded GPU ahead of it is the A100 PCIe 80 GB, which leads by 5.4%.

Use-case splits follow these strengths. The Arc A310E suits low-power, space-constrained systems requiring basic 3D acceleration and multi-display output. Its 75 W draw and no power connector requirement simplify integration. The RTX 6000D targets high-throughput compute environments, AI inference and training, and professional rendering where 84 GB of GDDR7 memory and 624 tensor cores are relevant. Its 600 W TDP and 1000 W suggested PSU assume a workstation or server platform with adequate power delivery.

The physical and interface differences reinforce this split. The Arc A310E's 168 mm length and single-slot profile fit where the RTX 6000D's 304 mm dual-slot design cannot. The RTX 6000D's PCIe 5.0 x16 interface provides double the lane width and a newer bus generation compared to the Arc A310E's PCIe 4.0 x8. Both cards support the same API levels, meaning software compatibility is not a differentiator, but the scale of available resources is.