Intel Arc A350M vs NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile Comparison

The comparison between the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile and the Intel Arc A350M is defined by a stark contrast in performance class and target workload, despite both GPUs occupying the 70th percentile in the overall benchmark distribution. The data positions the RTX A5000 Mobile as a high-end mobile workstation part, while the Arc A350M is an entry-level mobile solution.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains only two comparable benchmark runs, and the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile wins both decisively. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A5000 Mobile scores 110,877 points, while the Intel Arc A350M manages 24,546 points. This results in a delta of 351.7% in favor of the NVIDIA part, making the performance gap roughly four and a half times. A gap of this magnitude indicates that the RTX A5000 Mobile operates in a fundamentally different performance tier for compute-heavy OpenCL workloads.

The Vulkan benchmark tells a similar story, though the margin is slightly narrower. The RTX A5000 Mobile scores 88,144 points against the Arc A350M's 24,747 points, a delta of 256.2%. While the absolute gap is still enormous, the Intel part performs relatively better in Vulkan than it does in OpenCL. The Arc A350M's Vulkan score is actually its stronger result, outpacing its OpenCL score by 201 points, while the RTX A5000 Mobile's OpenCL score towers over its Vulkan result by 22,733 points. This suggests the NVIDIA architecture is particularly optimized for OpenCL-style compute, whereas Intel's Xe-HPG architecture shows a more balanced, albeit lower, performance profile across these two APIs.

When looking at the aggregate benchmark scores, the average scores of the two GPUs are remarkably close. The RTX A5000 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 24,763, while the Arc A350M sits at 24,647, a difference of only 0.5%. This is because the RTX A5000 Mobile's average is pulled down by its lower scores in older DirectX tests, such as its Passmark DirectX 10 score of 115 and DirectX 12 score of 72. The Arc A350M does not have comparable Passmark data in the fact pack, so the aggregate comparison is skewed by the differing test suites available for each GPU. The head-to-head results, which use identical tests, are the more reliable indicator of relative performance, and they show a clear NVIDIA dominance.

The Verdict

The data clearly indicates that the RTX A5000 Mobile is the superior performer in raw compute capability. Its 351.7% lead in OpenCL and 256.2% lead in Vulkan are not marginal advantages; they represent a generational and class-level gap. Any workload that relies on general-purpose GPU compute or modern graphics APIs will be dramatically faster on the NVIDIA part.

The Intel Arc A350M should be the choice for scenarios where the GPU's low power draw is the primary consideration. With a TDP of 25 W compared to the NVIDIA's 150 W, the Arc A350M is designed for thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermal management take precedence over sheer performance. The data does not show the Arc A350M winning any benchmark, so its appeal rests entirely on its efficiency profile and its ability to fit into systems where a 150 W GPU is physically and thermally impossible.

For users who prioritize performance, the RTX A5000 Mobile is the only logical choice based on the benchmark data. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth provide the resources necessary for demanding professional applications, a requirement that a 4 GB memory buffer with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth cannot meet. The RTX A5000 Mobile is also the only one of the two with a defined successor (Ada-MW) and predecessor (Quadro Turing-M), indicating it is a mature product line aimed at sustained professional workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The RTX A5000 Mobile uses NVIDIA's Ampere architecture, implemented on an 8 nm process node from Samsung. The chip, designated GA104, contains 17,400 million transistors on a die size of 392 mm², yielding a transistor density of 44.4 million per square millimeter.

The Intel Arc A350M is based on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, manufactured by TSMC on a 6 nm process. This chip contains 7,200 million transistors on a much smaller die of 157 mm², achieving a slightly higher transistor density of 45.9 million per square millimeter. The architectural philosophies diverge here: NVIDIA has opted for a massive chip with abundant resources, while Intel has chosen a smaller, denser chip that can operate at lower power levels.

The resource allocation reflects this divergence. The RTX A5000 Mobile has 6,144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 raster operation pipelines. It also includes 48 ray tracing cores and 192 tensor cores, making it a fully-featured accelerator for both graphics and AI workloads. The Arc A350M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, along with 6 ray tracing cores. Notably, the Intel part lists no tensor cores, which means it lacks the dedicated AI acceleration hardware that the NVIDIA GPU possesses.

The compute capabilities differ in character as well. The RTX A5000 Mobile delivers 19.35 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and matches that with 19.35 TFLOPS of FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio. The Arc A350M offers 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32 but doubles that to 6.758 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. This suggests the Intel architecture is designed to boost performance in workloads that can utilize reduced precision, while NVIDIA's Ampere architecture provides equal throughput across both precisions.

Specification Differences

The most obvious specification difference is the memory configuration. The RTX A5000 Mobile has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, producing a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. The Arc A350M has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA part provides four times the memory capacity and exactly four times the bandwidth.

Clock speeds also differ substantially. The RTX A5000 Mobile has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 1575 MHz. The Arc A350M has a higher base clock of 1150 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. Despite the Intel part's higher clocks, its much smaller execution resource pool results in far lower throughput rates: the Arc A350M achieves 52.80 GPixel/s and 105.6 GTexel/s, while the RTX A5000 Mobile achieves 151.2 GPixel/s and 302.4 GTexel/s.

Power consumption is a critical differentiator. The RTX A5000 Mobile has a TDP of 150 W, while the Arc A350M is rated at just 25 W. The NVIDIA part requires no external power connectors per the fact pack, while the Intel part lists none as well. The bus interface also differs: the RTX A5000 Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Arc A350M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and both are marked as end-of-life products.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 24,763, which is 0.5% higher than the Intel Arc A350M's average of 24,647.

Q: How much faster is the RTX A5000 Mobile in OpenCL?

A: The RTX A5000 Mobile scores 110,877 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 351.7% higher than the Arc A350M's score of 24,546.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A350M have tensor cores?

A: No, the fact pack lists no tensor cores for the Intel Arc A350M, while the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile has 192 tensor cores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile has 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is exactly four times the 112.0 GB/s available on the Intel Arc A350M.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc A350M has a boost clock of 2200 MHz, which is higher than the RTX A5000 Mobile's boost clock of 1575 MHz.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No, both the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile and the Intel Arc A350M are marked as end-of-life products in the production status field.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A5000 Mobile wins in every measured performance category. It is the dominant choice for OpenCL compute, with a 351.7% advantage, and for Vulkan graphics, with a 256.2% advantage. Its 16 GB memory buffer and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for large datasets, high-resolution textures, and professional visualization tasks. The presence of 192 tensor cores gives it a dedicated capability for AI inference and machine learning workloads that the Arc A350M simply cannot match. The 150 W TDP indicates it is designed for larger laptops or mobile workstations where performance is the priority.

The Intel Arc A350M wins in efficiency and portability. Its 25 W TDP is one-sixth of the NVIDIA part's power draw, making it suitable for ultraportable laptops without discrete cooling solutions. Its higher boost clock of 2200 MHz suggests it can deliver bursts of performance when needed, even if sustained throughput is limited. The 6 nm TSMC process node and higher transistor density of 45.9M / mm² indicate a modern, compact design. The Arc A350M's FP16 performance of 6.758 TFLOPS, which is double its FP32 rate, gives it a relative advantage in workloads that can use half-precision math, even if the absolute numbers are still far below the NVIDIA part. For users who need basic GPU acceleration in a low-power package, the Arc A350M is the appropriate choice, but the benchmark data shows no scenario where it outperforms the RTX A5000 Mobile.