Intel Arc A350M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile and the Intel Arc A350M represent two very different approaches to mobile graphics, separated by a wide performance gulf. The data shows that in the two shared benchmark tests, the NVIDIA part leads by margins exceeding 300%, making this comparison less about nuance and more about confirming a clear hierarchy for gaming and compute workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two benchmarks shared between these GPUs are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the results are decisively lopsided. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile scores 117,866, while the Intel Arc A350M manages 24,546. This translates to a 380.2% lead for the NVIDIA part. That is not a marginal victory; it is a complete rout, indicating that in raw compute tasks that leverage OpenCL, the RTX 3080 Ti Mobile operates in a different performance class entirely.

The Vulkan results tell the same story. The RTX 3080 Ti Mobile scores 107,502, against 24,747 for the Arc A350M, a difference of 334.4%. While both GPUs support the same DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) feature set, the execution speed is vastly different. The NVIDIA GPU’s average benchmark score of 25,740, when compared to the Intel part's 24,647, might suggest they are close, but that metric is skewed by the fact that the Intel card only has two benchmark entries, both of which are significantly lower than the NVIDIA's strongest results.

Looking at the broader context, the RTX 3080 Ti Mobile's closest rivals, based on average score, are the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 (0.1% faster) and the AMD Radeon RX 6700M (0.4% slower). This places it firmly in the upper-midrange to high-end mobile segment. In contrast, the Arc A350M's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 590 (0.4% slower), a desktop card from a previous generation. This positioning confirms that the Arc A350M is not competing for the same performance crown; it is aimed at a much lower tier of performance, likely for thin-and-light laptops where efficiency is paramount.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile wins in every single benchmark category where both have data. This includes both compute and graphics API tests. Its score of 19,288 in Passmark G3D, alongside 8,471 in Passmark GPU Compute, indicates a strong balance between gaming rasterization and general-purpose compute. The 512.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, enabled by a 256-bit bus and 16 GB of GDDR6, is a massive advantage for high-resolution textures and data-heavy workloads.

The Intel Arc A350M, with its 112.0 GB/s bandwidth and 64-bit bus, is designed for a different purpose. Its wins, if any, come from efficiency rather than raw speed. With a TDP of 25 W compared to the NVIDIA's 115 W, it is clear that the Intel part is meant for systems where battery life and thermals are prioritized over frame rates. The data does not show a single benchmark where the Arc A350M comes out ahead, but its lower power draw suggests a clear advantage in sustained performance in a chassis with limited cooling, something the benchmark scores alone do not capture. The NVIDIA part’s higher pixel rate of 121.0 GPixel/s versus the Intel's 52.80 GPixel/s further underscores the gap in fill-rate-bound scenarios.

The Verdict

The choice between these two GPUs is straightforward based on the benchmark data. If you require maximum performance for gaming or creative workloads, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile is the only option with usable power. Its 380.2% lead in OpenCL and 334.4% lead in Vulkan are not just numbers; they represent the difference between playable and unplayable frame rates in modern titles, or between a fluid viewport and a stuttering one in 3D applications.

However, if the priority is a thin, light, and quiet laptop where battery life is paramount, the Intel Arc A350M is the more sensible choice. Its 25 W TDP means it can be passively cooled or run with a minimal fan curve, something impossible for the 115 W NVIDIA part. The data shows that the Intel GPU, while slow, is not a slouch relative to its class, sitting within 0.8% of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT in average score. This suggests that for light gaming or accelerated web browsing, it is a capable performer that sips power.

The RTX 3080 Ti Mobile's percentile rank of 71 against all GPUs, versus the Arc A350M's rank of 70, is misleading. The NVIDIA part’s absolute scores are far higher; the percentile is a reflection of the distribution of all tested GPUs, not a head-to-head comparison. The verdict is that the RTX 3080 Ti Mobile is for demanding users, while the Arc A350M is for everyday users who need integrated-class convenience with a bit more graphics headroom.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile in OpenCL?

A: It is 380.2% faster than the Intel Arc A350M, scoring 117,866 versus 24,546 in the Geekbench OpenCL test.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile, with 512.0 GB/s, is significantly higher than the Intel Arc A350M's 112.0 GB/s.

Q: What are the closest rivals to the Intel Arc A350M?

A: Based on average benchmark scores, its closest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 590 (0.4% slower) and the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (0.5% slower).

Q: Does the Intel Arc A350M support the same DirectX version as the NVIDIA GPU?

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

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

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile has a TDP of 115 W, while the Intel Arc A350M has a TDP of 25 W.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, whereas the Intel Arc A350M has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile uses the Ampere architecture (chip GA103) manufactured on Samsung's 8 nm process, with a die size of 496 mm² and 22,000 million transistors. The Intel Arc A350M uses the Xe-HPG architecture (chip DG2-128) on TSMC's 6 nm process, with a die size of 157 mm² and 7,200 million transistors. This means Intel has a higher transistor density (45.9M per mm²) than NVIDIA (44.4M per mm²), but the NVIDIA chip is physically much larger and more complex.

Core counts differ drastically. The RTX 3080 Ti Mobile has 7,424 shading units, 232 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, along with 58 ray-tracing cores and 232 tensor cores. The Arc A350M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with only 6 ray-tracing cores and no tensor cores listed. This makes the NVIDIA part a far more capable compute device, particularly for ray-traced workloads and AI-accelerated tasks, where its tensor cores provide a distinct advantage. The Intel part’s FP16 rate of 6.758 TFLOPS is double its FP32 rate of 3.379 TFLOPS, whereas the NVIDIA part has a 1:1 ratio at 18.71 TFLOPS for both, indicating different design priorities for mixed-precision math.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal a clear hierarchy in almost every category. The most obvious difference is in memory: the NVIDIA part offers 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, while the Intel part has only 4 GB on a 64-bit bus. This leads to a bandwidth difference of 512.0 GB/s versus 112.0 GB/s. Clock speeds also differ, with the Intel Arc A350M having a higher base clock (1150 MHz vs 810 MHz) and boost clock (2200 MHz vs 1260 MHz), but this does not compensate for the massive core count difference.

The power envelope is the key differentiator. The RTX 3080 Ti Mobile is rated at 115 W, requiring a dedicated cooling solution and a robust power delivery system. The Arc A350M is rated at just 25 W and is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a slot width of "IGP", meaning it is designed to be soldered directly to the motherboard and share the system's thermal budget. The NVIDIA GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the Intel GPU uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Both are end-of-life products, with release dates of 2022-01-24 for the NVIDIA and 2022-03-29 for the Intel. Neither has a listed launch MSRP, and both are marked as "Portable Device Dependent" for display outputs, meaning the connectors are dictated by the laptop manufacturer.