Intel Arc A310E vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains only one benchmark result for the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server, and no comparable benchmark entries for the Intel Arc A310E. The database shows a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5996 for the NVIDIA part. The Intel Arc A310E has no individual benchmark scores listed, so a direct numerical comparison between the two cannot be established from the available measurements.

The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server sits at the 34th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals in the recorded data are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M with an average score of 6000, the AMD Radeon RX 6400 with 6001, the AMD FirePro W4100 with 5987, and the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M with 5986. The RTX PRO 6000 trails the RX 6400 by 0.1 percent and the GTX 770M by 0.1 percent, while it leads the FirePro W4100 by 0.2 percent and the Quadro K4000M by 0.2 percent. These deltas are small, indicating that the single recorded benchmark places the RTX PRO 6000 in a narrow performance band relative to those four older or lower-tier cards.

The Intel Arc A310E holds a 50th percentile position across all GPUs, which is a higher percentile rank than the RTX PRO 6000's 34th percentile. However, percentile rank alone does not provide a direct score comparison, and the database does not supply a Steel Nomad result for the A310E. The absence of head-to-head benchmark entries means the data cannot confirm which part wins any specific test. The wins counter shows zero wins for each product, reflecting the empty head-to-head array.

What can be stated from the data is that the RTX PRO 6000 delivers a massive raw compute specification: 126.0 TFLOPS FP32 and 126.0 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. The Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 and 6.144 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. These are theoretical throughput figures, not benchmark scores, but they indicate a 41-fold difference in FP32 throughput in favor of the NVIDIA product. Similarly, memory bandwidth differs enormously: the RTX PRO 6000 provides 1.79 TB/s over a 512-bit GDDR7 interface, while the A310E provides 124.0 GB/s over a 64-bit GDDR6 bus. That is a 14.4x bandwidth advantage for the NVIDIA card.

Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern. The RTX PRO 6000 reaches 502.5 GPixel/s and 1,968.0 GTexel/s. The Arc A310E reaches 32.00 GPixel/s and 64.00 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA part is roughly 15.7x faster in pixel fillrate and 30.75x faster in texture fillrate. These are architectural limits, not measured application performance, but they define the ceiling for each card's workload capability.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server is the clear choice for any workload that demands maximum throughput, memory capacity, and bandwidth. It offers 96 GB of GDDR7 memory versus 4 GB of GDDR6, a 512-bit bus versus 64-bit, and 24064 shading units versus 768. The RTX PRO 6000 also includes 752 tensor cores and 188 ray tracing cores, while the Arc A310E lists 6 ray tracing cores and no tensor core count. For compute-heavy server tasks, large model inference, or high-resolution rendering, the RTX PRO 6000's specifications dominate every measurable category.

The Intel Arc A310E, however, is the only one of the two that is end-of-life, with a production status of "End-of-life" and a successor named Battlemage. The RTX PRO 6000 is marked "Active" with a successor named Server Rubin. The A310E is a single-slot, 75 W card with no power connectors and a suggested power supply of 250 W. The RTX PRO 6000 is a dual-slot card requiring a single 16-pin connector and a 1000 W suggested power supply. The A310E also uses PCIe 4.0 x8 while the RTX PRO 6000 uses PCIe 5.0 x16.

The percentile data complicates a simple "bigger is better" conclusion. The RTX PRO 6000's 34th percentile is lower than the A310E's 50th percentile, but this reflects the distribution of all GPUs in the database, not a direct comparison. The single benchmark score of 5996 places the RTX PRO 6000 very close to the GTX 770M and RX 6400, which are far less capable on paper. This suggests the recorded benchmark may not exercise the RTX PRO 6000's full capabilities, or the benchmark environment was limited. The A310E has no benchmark score in the database, so its percentile is derived from other data that is not shown in this record.

For a buyer who needs a low-power, compact, display-capable card, the A310E fits that profile: 75 W TDP, single-slot, 168 mm length, 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. For a buyer who needs maximum compute, memory, and bandwidth in a server context, the RTX PRO 6000 is the only option with recorded specifications that approach that tier. The data does not support a recommendation for the A310E in any high-throughput scenario, and it does not support a recommendation for the RTX PRO 6000 in any low-power or compact scenario.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc A310E uses the DG2-128 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server uses the GB202 chip on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, from the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 122.9M per mm². The process node is one step smaller and the transistor density is 2.68x higher for the NVIDIA part.

Memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The A310E uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX PRO 6000 uses 96 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth. The memory clock for the A310E is 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective), while the RTX PRO 6000 runs at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). The GDDR7 standard delivers higher effective data rate despite a lower base clock.

Compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The A310E has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 ray tracing cores. The RTX PRO 6000 has 24064 shading units, 752 TMUs, 192 ROPs, 188 ray tracing cores, and 752 tensor cores. The A310E lists no tensor core count, while the RTX PRO 6000's tensor cores are a defining feature for AI workloads. The FP32 and FP16 rates reflect this: 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 for the A310E versus 126.0 TFLOPS for the RTX PRO 6000, and 6.144 TFLOPS FP16 for the A310E versus 126.0 TFLOPS FP16 for the RTX PRO 6000. The A310E uses a 2:1 FP16 ratio, meaning it halves FP16 throughput, while the RTX PRO 6000 offers 1:1 FP16, matching its FP32 rate.

Clock behavior also differs. The A310E has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz, indicating a locked frequency. The RTX PRO 6000 has a base clock of 1590 MHz and a boost clock of 2617 MHz, a 64.6% boost headroom. The power envelopes reflect this: 75 W for the A310E versus 600 W for the RTX PRO 6000. The A310E requires no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU; the RTX PRO 6000 requires a single 16-pin connector and a 1000 W suggested PSU.

Physical dimensions diverge considerably. The A310E is 168 mm long, 69 mm tall, and 20 mm wide, in a single-slot form factor. The RTX PRO 6000 is 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, in a dual-slot form factor. The bus interface differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the A310E versus PCIe 5.0 x16 for the RTX PRO 6000. Display outputs are similar in count but different in version: 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 for the A310E versus 4x DisplayPort 2.1b for the RTX PRO 6000. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The A310E's predecessor is Xe Graphics and its successor is Battlemage. The RTX PRO 6000's predecessor is Server Hopper and its successor is Server Rubin. The A310E was released on 2024-03-31, the RTX PRO 6000 on 2025-03-17, a gap of roughly one year. The A310E is end-of-life; the RTX PRO 6000 is active.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 throughput?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server achieves 126.0 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc A310E achieves 3.072 TFLOPS FP32. The NVIDIA part is 41x higher.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 has 96 GB of GDDR7 memory, while the A310E has 4 GB of GDDR6. The RTX PRO 6000 also uses a 512-bit bus versus a 64-bit bus, giving 1.79 TB/s versus 124.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The A310E has a 75 W TDP with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU. The RTX PRO 6000 has a 600 W TDP with one 16-pin connector and a 1000 W suggested PSU.

Q: Are either of these cards still in production?

A: The Intel Arc A310E is marked "End-of-life" with a successor named Battlemage. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server is marked "Active" with a successor named Server Rubin.

Q: What benchmark score does the RTX PRO 6000 have?

A: The database records a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5996 for the RTX PRO 6000. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6400, scores 6001, a 0.1 percent difference.

Q: Which card has more display outputs?

A: Both cards have four display outputs. The A310E has 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0, while the RTX PRO 6000 has 4x DisplayPort 2.1b.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A310E wins in power efficiency, physical footprint, and power delivery simplicity. Its 75 W TDP is one-eighth of the RTX PRO 6000's 600 W TDP. It requires no external power connector, while the RTX PRO 6000 needs a 16-pin connector. Its dimensions (168 mm x 69 mm x 20 mm, single-slot) are smaller than the RTX PRO 6000's (267 mm x 111 mm x 40 mm, dual-slot). The A310E also has a higher base clock (2000 MHz versus 1590 MHz) and matches its boost clock at 2000 MHz, meaning it runs at a constant frequency without thermal boost variance. The A310E is also earlier to market (2024-03-31 versus 2025-03-17) and has a lower percentile rank position? No, the A310E has a higher percentile (50th versus 34th), though this does not reflect a benchmark score.

The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 wins in every raw performance specification: shading units (24064 versus 768), TMUs (752 versus 32), ROPs (192 versus 16), ray tracing cores (188 versus 6), tensor cores (752 versus none listed), FP32 (126.0 versus 3.072 TFLOPS), FP16 (126.0 versus 6.144 TFLOPS), pixel rate (502.5 versus 32.00 GPixel/s), texture rate (1,968.0 versus 64.00 GTexel/s), memory size (96 GB versus 4 GB), memory bandwidth (1.79 TB/s versus 124.0 GB/s), bus width (512-bit versus 64-bit), and bus interface (PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8). Its boost clock reaches 2617 MHz, a 64.6% uplift over its base clock, whereas the A310E does not boost at all.

The RTX PRO 6000 also has a larger die (750 mm² versus 157 mm²), more transistors (92,200 million versus 7,200 million), and higher transistor density (122.9M per mm² versus 45.9M per mm²). Its GDDR7 memory runs at 28 Gbps effective, nearly double the A310E's 15.5 Gbps effective. The RTX PRO 6000's display outputs are newer (DisplayPort 2.1b versus 2.0). It is also the only card with a recorded benchmark score, 5996 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, though that score sits within 0.2 percent of much older rivals like the Quadro K4000M and FirePro W4100.

For a server deployment where power density, cooling, and slot space are constrained, the A310E's single-slot, 75 W, connector-free design is the practical fit. For a server workload that needs large memory capacity, high bandwidth, tensor acceleration, and maximum compute throughput, the RTX PRO 6000 is the only part with specifications that meet those demands. The data does not show a scenario where both cards compete on equal footing; they target opposite ends of the GPU spectrum.