Intel Arc A350M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile Comparison

The Intel Arc A350M and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile represent two vastly different approaches to mobile graphics, separated by a significant performance gulf. The data shows that the NVIDIA part dominates the shared benchmarks, but the Intel chip’s architectural efficiency and low power profile create a distinct niche. This analysis examines the head-to-head scores, architectural philosophies, and use-case scenarios to determine which GPU is appropriate for which workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs share only two benchmark results in the database: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile wins decisively. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA part scores 106,022, while the Intel Arc A350M scores 24,546. This represents a delta of -76.8% for the Intel chip, meaning the RTX 3070 Ti Mobile delivers roughly four times the raw compute throughput in this API. The Vulkan result is similarly lopsided: NVIDIA scores 100,027 versus Intel’s 24,747, a -75.3% delta. These aren’t marginal wins; they are generational and class-level stomps.

Looking at the absolute numbers, the RTX 3070 Ti Mobile’s OpenCL score of 106,022 places it in a different stratosphere. Its nearest rival in the database, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile, scores 23,628 on average, a delta of -0.5% from the 3070 Ti’s average of 23,518. Wait — that rival score is the average benchmark score, not the Geekbench score. The 3070 Ti’s average benchmark score is 23,518, which is actually lower than its own Geekbench OpenCL score of 106,022. This discrepancy highlights that the Geekbench tests are heavily compute-oriented, while the average includes other, less demanding tests. Regardless, the head-to-head deltas are clear: NVIDIA wins 2-0.

The Intel Arc A350M’s Geekbench scores of 24,546 (OpenCL) and 24,747 (Vulkan) are remarkably consistent, showing less than a 1% variance between APIs. This suggests the Xe-HPG architecture scales predictably across different compute frameworks. The NVIDIA part, by contrast, shows a 5.7% drop from OpenCL to Vulkan (106,022 to 100,027), indicating a slight API preference. For context, the Arc A350M’s average benchmark score of 24,647 puts it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs, while the RTX 3070 Ti Mobile’s 23,518 average places it in the 69th percentile. Despite the massive head-to-head loss, the Intel chip is not an outlier; it sits near the AMD Radeon RX 590 (average 24,744, delta -0.4%) and the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (average 24,763, delta -0.5%).

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two is vast, starting with the manufacturing process. The Intel Arc A350M is built on TSMC’s 6 nm node, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile uses Samsung’s 8 nm process. This gives Intel a density advantage: the DG2-128 chip packs 7,200 million transistors into a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9 million per mm². NVIDIA’s GA104 chip, in contrast, houses 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die, with a density of 44.4 million per mm². The Intel chip is smaller and denser, but the NVIDIA chip has over twice the transistor budget.

The memory subsystems are worlds apart. The Arc A350M features 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, producing 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 3070 Ti Mobile doubles the capacity to 8 GB, quadruples the bus width to 256-bit, and achieves 448.0 GB/s — exactly four times the bandwidth. This 4x memory bandwidth disparity directly explains the benchmark deltas, as memory-bound compute tasks will starve the Intel chip. The clock speeds tell an interesting story: Intel’s base clock is 1150 MHz and boost is 2200 MHz, while NVIDIA’s are 915 MHz base and 1410 MHz boost. The Intel part runs much faster, but it has far fewer execution units to feed.

The compute resource counts are staggeringly different. The Arc A350M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The RTX 3070 Ti Mobile has 5,888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 96 ROPs — approximately 7.7x the shaders, 3.8x the TMUs, and 4x the ROPs. Ray tracing hardware follows the same pattern: Intel provides 6 RT cores, NVIDIA provides 46. NVIDIA also adds 184 tensor cores, a feature completely absent from the Intel chip. The pixel rate is 52.80 GPixel/s for Intel versus 135.4 GPixel/s for NVIDIA, and the texture rate is 105.6 GTexel/s versus 259.4 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 3.379 TFLOPS for Intel, while NVIDIA reaches 16.60 TFLOPS — nearly a 5x gap. Interestingly, the FP16 figures show NVIDIA at 16.60 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while Intel reaches 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), meaning the NVIDIA part doesn’t need a separate FP16 path.

The power envelopes are the most dramatic differentiator. The Intel Arc A350M is rated at 25 W TDP, while the RTX 3070 Ti Mobile consumes 115 W TDP. That’s a 4.6x power draw for roughly a 4x performance increase in the head-to-head tests. The efficiency per watt is comparable, but the absolute limits are entirely different. The Intel chip is integrated (IGP slot width), uses PCIe 4.0 x8, and draws no external power connectors. The NVIDIA part uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and lists "None" for power connectors, suggesting it relies on the motherboard’s power delivery rather than a separate plug, but the 115 W TDP requires a robust cooling solution.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3070 Ti Mobile wins in every measurable benchmark category where they overlap. Its 106,022 OpenCL score and 100,027 Vulkan score are roughly 4.3x and 4.0x the Intel’s respective scores. This makes it the clear choice for any compute-heavy workload: 3D rendering, video encoding, machine learning inference, and high-refresh-rate gaming. The 8 GB memory capacity and 448 GB/s bandwidth allow it to handle large textures and datasets without swapping. The 184 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for AI acceleration, which the Intel chip lacks entirely.

The Arc A350M’s wins are more subtle. It wins on power efficiency: 25 W TDP versus 115 W means it can be deployed in thin-and-light laptops without active cooling, or in devices where battery life is paramount. Its higher clock speeds (2200 MHz boost versus 1410 MHz) suggest it can ramp up quickly for burst workloads. The 6 nm process node and higher transistor density (45.9M/mm² vs 44.4M/mm²) indicate better silicon utilization per area. For esports titles or older games that don’t require massive memory bandwidth, the Arc A350M’s 3.379 TFLOPS might suffice at lower resolutions and settings. The 70th percentile ranking versus the 69th for NVIDIA also shows that, on average, the Intel chip doesn’t embarrass itself in the broader GPU landscape.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification that matters. The manufacturing process is 6 nm (TSMC) for Intel versus 8 nm (Samsung) for NVIDIA. Transistor count is 7,200 million versus 17,400 million, and die size is 157 mm² versus 392 mm². Clock speeds: Intel runs at 1150 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while NVIDIA runs at 915 MHz base and 1410 MHz boost. Memory capacity is 4 GB versus 8 GB, bus width is 64-bit versus 256-bit, and bandwidth is 112.0 GB/s versus 448.0 GB/s. The compute units are 768 shaders, 48 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 6 RT cores for Intel; NVIDIA has 5,888 shaders, 184 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 46 RT cores, plus 184 tensor cores. Pixel rates are 52.80 GPixel/s versus 135.4 GPixel/s, texture rates are 105.6 GTexel/s versus 259.4 GTexel/s, and FP32 is 3.379 TFLOPS versus 16.60 TFLOPS. FP16 is 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 16.60 TFLOPS (1:1). TDP is 25 W versus 115 W. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Everything else — APIs, display outputs, production status (both end-of-life), and release dates (2022-03-29 for Intel, 2022-01-03 for NVIDIA) — is identical or comparable.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile. Its FP32 throughput is 16.60 TFLOPS compared to the Intel Arc A350M’s 3.379 TFLOPS, a 4.9x advantage.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The NVIDIA part offers 448.0 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, while the Intel part provides 112.0 GB/s over a 64-bit bus. NVIDIA has exactly four times the bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient?

A: The Intel Arc A350M has a 25 W TDP versus 115 W for the NVIDIA part. The Intel chip delivers 3.379 TFLOPS at that power, while NVIDIA delivers 16.60 TFLOPS at 4.6x the power.

Q: Do both GPUs support ray tracing?

A: Yes. The Intel Arc A350M has 6 RT cores, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile has 46 RT cores.

Q: Which GPU has a higher benchmark percentile ranking?

A: The Intel Arc A350M ranks in the 70th percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile ranks in the 69th percentile, despite losing all head-to-head comparisons.

Q: What is the release date difference?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile was released on 2022-01-03, and the Intel Arc A350M followed on 2022-03-29.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for performance: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile is the superior GPU by any compute metric. It wins both shared benchmarks by over 75%, has 4x the memory bandwidth, 4.9x the FP32 throughput, and 7.7x the shading units. Anyone needing maximum frame rates, large texture memory, or AI acceleration should choose the NVIDIA part. Its 8 GB VRAM and 184 tensor cores make it suitable for modern AAA games and creative workloads.

The Intel Arc A350M’s case rests entirely on efficiency. At 25 W TDP, it can operate in ultra-portable devices where the 115 W NVIDIA chip would be impossible to cool or power. Its 70th percentile ranking shows it’s not a low-end outlier, and its 6 nm process with higher transistor density suggests a modern, compact design. For users prioritizing battery life, quiet operation, and light gaming over raw performance, the Arc A350M is a rational choice. For everyone else, the RTX 3070 Ti Mobile is the only option that makes sense from the benchmark data.