Intel Arc A350M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear and decisive advantage for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti when both GPUs are tested in the same workloads. In the two shared benchmark tests, the GTX 980 Ti wins outright, with no victories recorded for the Intel Arc A350M.

The largest gap appears in the Geekbench Vulkan test. Here, the GTX 980 Ti scores 47,724 points against the Arc A350M's 24,747 points. That is a 92.8% delta in favor of the NVIDIA part. In practical terms, the older desktop card delivers nearly double the raw compute output in this API, which reflects its much larger silicon and higher power envelope.

The Geekbench OpenCL result is closer but still heavily favors the GTX 980 Ti. The NVIDIA card posts 43,513 points, while the Intel mobile GPU manages 24,546 points. The delta here is 77.3%. While OpenCL can sometimes mask architectural differences, the gap is substantial enough to indicate that the GTX 980 Ti has a commanding lead in general compute throughput.

Looking at overall average scores, the GTX 980 Ti sits at 28,020 across all recorded benchmarks, while the Arc A350M averages 24,647. That places the NVIDIA card about 13.7% higher in aggregate performance. The percentile rankings reinforce this: the GTX 980 Ti lands in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the Arc A350M rests in the 70th percentile. Both are mid-pack performers, but the GTX 980 Ti holds a consistent edge.

The rival comparisons from the database help contextualize each card's standing. The GTX 980 Ti's nearest neighbors include the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X (average score 27,973, delta 0.2%), the AMD FirePro S7150 (28,117, delta -0.3%), and the AMD Radeon RX 7800M (27,883, delta 0.5%). These are all within a fraction of a percent, meaning the GTX 980 Ti sits in a tightly contested performance tier. The Intel Arc A350M, by contrast, is bracketed by the AMD Radeon RX 590 (24,744, delta -0.4%), the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (24,763, delta -0.5%), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (24,442, delta 0.8%). The Arc A350M is only 1.5% ahead of the GeForce GTX 1630 (24,277), which shows it is competing with entry-level desktop parts from several years ago.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti has an average benchmark score of 28,020, while the Intel Arc A350M averages 24,647. The GTX 980 Ti is roughly 13.7% higher.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two in shared tests?

A: The biggest delta is in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the GTX 980 Ti scores 47,724 versus 24,747 for the Arc A350M. That is a 92.8% advantage for the NVIDIA card.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A350M win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. In the two recorded head-to-head tests (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the Intel card loses both. The win count is 2 for the GTX 980 Ti and 0 for the Arc A350M.

Q: How does the Intel Arc A350M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc A350M's nearest rivals are all within a narrow band. It is 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 590, 0.5% behind the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile, 0.8% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT, and 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630.

Q: What is the percentile ranking difference between the two cards?

A: The GTX 980 Ti sits in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the Arc A350M sits in the 70th percentile. Both are mid-tier performers, but the NVIDIA card ranks slightly higher.

Q: Which card has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The GTX 980 Ti delivers 6.060 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Arc A350M delivers 3.379 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA card is about 79% higher in raw FP32 throughput.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational and profound. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti uses the GM200 chip built on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc A350M uses the DG2-128 chip based on Xe-HPG architecture, also from TSMC but on a much more modern 6 nm node.

The transistor counts are surprisingly close in absolute terms: the GTX 980 Ti packs 8,000 million transistors across a massive 601 mm² die, while the Arc A350M contains 7,200 million transistors on a compact 157 mm² die. The transistor density tells the real story. The GTX 980 Ti has 13.3 million transistors per square millimeter, whereas the Arc A350M achieves 45.9 million per square millimeter. That is a 3.4x density advantage for the Intel part, which is exactly what you would expect from a 28 nm versus 6 nm comparison.

Shading unit counts diverge sharply. The GTX 980 Ti has 2,816 shading units, 176 texture mapping units, and 96 render output units. The Arc A350M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. Despite the Intel card's much smaller configuration, it also includes 6 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature the GTX 980 Ti lacks entirely. The NVIDIA part has no ray tracing hardware at all, reflecting its 2015-era design.

Memory subsystems are also fundamentally different. The GTX 980 Ti uses 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 336.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Arc A350M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, which yields only 112.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card has exactly three times the memory bandwidth, which is a decisive factor in high-resolution rendering and texture-heavy workloads.

Clock behavior differs as well. The GTX 980 Ti has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost of 1076 MHz. The Arc A350M has a base of 1150 MHz but boosts aggressively to 2200 MHz. The Intel part relies on high boost clocks to compensate for its smaller configuration, but the raw throughput math still favors the GTX 980 Ti.

Feature support shows the age gap. The GTX 980 Ti supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Arc A350M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel card's DirectX 12 Ultimate support includes features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading, which the older Maxwell architecture cannot handle. For modern game features, the Arc A350M has a clear compatibility edge, even though it loses on raw performance.

Power consumption is where the two could not be more different. The GTX 980 Ti has a TDP of 250 W and requires a 600 W suggested power supply, with a dual-slot cooler and both a 6-pin and 8-pin power connector. The Arc A350M is an integrated graphics package (IGP) with a 25 W TDP, no external power connectors, and no suggested PSU rating. That is a 10x difference in thermal budget, which explains the performance gap but also defines their intended use cases.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti is the faster GPU in every shared benchmark. It wins both head-to-head tests, has a higher average score, and ranks higher in the percentile distribution. If raw compute performance is the only criterion, the GTX 980 Ti is the clear choice.

However, the verdict depends heavily on context. The GTX 980 Ti is a desktop part from 2015 with a 250 W TDP, a dual-slot cooler, and a physical footprint of 267 mm in length. It is end-of-life, and its launch MSRP was 649 USD. The Intel Arc A350M is a mobile-focused IGP from 2022 with a 25 W TDP, no discrete dimensions listed, and no external power requirements. It is also end-of-life, but it is designed for portable devices where space and power are constrained.

For a desktop builder with a full-size case and a 600 W power supply, the GTX 980 Ti is the obvious pick. Its 92.8% lead in Vulkan and 77.3% lead in OpenCL are not minor differences; they represent a completely different performance class. The 6 GB GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus provides 336.6 GB/s of bandwidth, which is essential for high-resolution textures and demanding scenes.

For a laptop or compact portable system, the Arc A350M is the only realistic option between these two. You cannot install a 267 mm, dual-slot, 250 W card into a thin-and-light chassis. The Arc A350M's 25 W TDP and IGP form factor make it feasible for mobile devices, and its 6 ray tracing cores provide hardware-accelerated ray tracing that the GTX 980 Ti simply cannot offer. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which unlocks modern rendering techniques.

The real takeaway is that these GPUs are not competitors in the conventional sense. They occupy different ends of the performance and power spectrum. The GTX 980 Ti dominates in compute and bandwidth; the Arc A350M wins on efficiency, process technology, and modern feature support. Pick the GTX 980 Ti if you have the power budget and want maximum performance. Pick the Arc A350M if you need a capable GPU in a portable, low-power package.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti | Intel Arc A350M |

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

| Process Node | 28 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 8,000 million | 7,200 million |

| Die Size | 601 mm² | 157 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.3M / mm² | 45.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 1150 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1076 MHz | 2200 MHz |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 384 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 336.6 GB/s | 112.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2816 | 768 |

| TMUs | 176 | 48 |

| ROPs | 96 | 24 |

| RT Cores | None | 6 |

| FP32 Compute | 6.060 TFLOPS | 3.379 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Compute | Not listed | 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 25 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 | Portable Device Dependent |

| Release Date | 2015-06-01 | 2022-03-29 |

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 980 Ti wins decisively in raw compute and bandwidth-bound workloads. Its 336.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is three times that of the Arc A350M, making it far better suited for high-resolution textures, large framebuffers, and compute-heavy tasks like rendering or video processing. The 92.8% lead in Vulkan and 77.3% lead in OpenCL confirm that the NVIDIA card is the stronger general-purpose performer. Its 6.060 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput is nearly double the Arc A350M's 3.379 TFLOPS, which matters for scientific computing, AI inference, and any workload that saturates the shader array.

The Arc A350M wins on efficiency and portability. Its 25 W TDP is one-tenth of the GTX 980 Ti's 250 W, which means it generates far less heat and can be integrated into thin laptops without discrete cooling solutions. The 6 nm process node gives it a massive transistor density advantage (45.9M / mm² versus 13.3M / mm²), which reflects modern fabrication efficiency. It also has 6 ray tracing cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing that the GTX 980 Ti cannot perform at all. For games that use DirectX 12 Ultimate features, the Arc A350M has a compatibility advantage that no amount of raw throughput can overcome on the older card.

For use-case selection, the choice is straightforward. Desktop gaming, content creation, and compute workloads favor the GTX 980 Ti without question. Its higher average score, better percentile ranking, and overwhelming benchmark wins make it the superior performer in any scenario where power and space are available. Mobile productivity, casual gaming on the go, and any system requiring minimal power draw favor the Arc A350M. It cannot match the GTX 980 Ti's speed, but it offers modern features in a package that fits where the NVIDIA card physically cannot.