Intel Arc A350M vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell and Intel Arc A350M occupy different tiers of the mobile graphics landscape, and the benchmark data reflects a decisive performance gulf. In the two shared head-to-head tests, the NVIDIA part wins both, with margins exceeding 330%. The RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell delivers a Geekbench OpenCL score of 106,087 versus 24,546 for the Arc A350M, a 332.2% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens further: 113,865 against 24,747, a 360.1% lead. These are not incremental gains; they represent a generational and architectural chasm.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable data points are the two Geekbench compute tests, and both tell the same story. In OpenCL, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell scores 106,087, while the Intel Arc A350M manages 24,546. That is a delta of 332.2% in favor of NVIDIA. In Vulkan, the NVIDIA part scores 113,865, and the Intel part scores 24,747, a delta of 360.1%. The NVIDIA GPU is over four times faster in raw compute throughput in these workloads.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell also carries a substantial average benchmark score of 25,269 across its full test suite. This places it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs, with its nearest rival being the AMD Radeon RX 6700M at an average score of 25,633, which is 1.4% ahead of the NVIDIA part. The Intel Arc A350M, with only two benchmark scores available, achieves an average of 24,647, also landing in the 70th percentile. Its closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 590 at 24,744, which is 0.4% ahead of the Intel part.

The raw compute gap is further illustrated by the FP32 performance figures. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell delivers 17.03 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc A350M delivers 3.379 TFLOPS. This is a 5.04x difference in raw floating-point throughput. The NVIDIA part’s texture rate of 266.2 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 93.94 GPixel/s dwarf the Intel part’s 105.6 GTexel/s and 52.80 GPixel/s, respectively. The data shows a complete sweep for NVIDIA in every measurable compute and rasterization metric.

The Verdict

The verdict is unambiguous from the benchmark data: the NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell is the superior performer by a massive margin. Anyone requiring serious compute capability, professional 3D rendering, or high-end gaming should choose the NVIDIA part. Its 332.2% lead in OpenCL and 360.1% lead in Vulkan over the Intel Arc A350M make it the only viable option for demanding workloads. The Intel Arc A350M, with its lower scores, is strictly for light, casual use cases where power consumption is the primary concern.

The data shows that the NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell has 2 wins in head-to-head benchmarks, while the Intel Arc A350M has 0. This is a clean sweep. The NVIDIA part also has a higher average benchmark score (25,269 vs 24,647), though this is a modest 2.5% difference when considering the entire test suite. However, this overall average is diluted by the NVIDIA part’s inclusion of legacy DirectX tests, where it scores low (e.g., Passmark DirectX 9 at 241, DirectX 10 at 122, DirectX 11 at 174, DirectX 12 at 80). The Intel part lacks these legacy scores, so its average is based solely on modern compute tests. In the modern compute tests that matter, the NVIDIA part is overwhelmingly faster.

For professionals or enthusiasts, the RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell is the clear pick. For users with minimal needs and strict power or thermal limits, the Intel Arc A350M exists, but its performance is fundamentally a different class. The data does not support any other conclusion.

Architecture Differences

The architecture gap is foundational. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell uses the GB206 chip built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc A350M uses the DG2-128 chip on the Xe-HPG architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. The NVIDIA part has a transistor count of 21,900 million on a die size of 181 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 121.0M / mm². The Intel part has 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, with a density of 45.9M / mm². This means the NVIDIA chip packs nearly three times the transistors into a similar physical footprint.

The NVIDIA part features 4,352 shading units, 136 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. It also includes 34 RT cores and 136 tensor cores. The Intel Arc A350M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with 6 RT cores and no tensor cores listed. The sheer difference in shader count—4,352 versus 768—explains the massive compute gap. The NVIDIA part’s FP32 throughput is 17.03 TFLOPS, while the Intel part is 3.379 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA part also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (17.03 TFLOPS), while the Intel part runs FP16 at a 2:1 ratio (6.758 TFLOPS).

The memory architecture also differs significantly. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell uses 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc A350M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 112.0 GB/s. This is a 2.57x bandwidth advantage for NVIDIA, which is critical for texture-heavy workloads and high-resolution rendering. The NVIDIA part also supports PCIe 5.0 x8, while the Intel part uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

Specification Differences

The specification table highlights several key differences beyond compute. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell has a base clock of 982 MHz and a boost clock of 1957 MHz. The Intel Arc A350M has a higher base clock of 1150 MHz and a boost of 2200 MHz. Despite the higher clocks, the Intel part cannot overcome its lower core count. Memory speed differs as well: the NVIDIA part runs at 1125 MHz (18 Gbps effective) with GDDR7, while the Intel part runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) with GDDR6.

Power consumption is a major differentiator. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell has a TDP of 70 W, while the Intel Arc A350M has a TDP of 25 W. The NVIDIA part requires a suggested 250 W PSU, while the Intel part has no such requirement. The NVIDIA part is a dual-slot card with no power connectors, measuring 167 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. The Intel part is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with dimensions listed as null, meaning it is typically soldered to a motherboard. The NVIDIA part offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1b outputs, while the Intel part’s display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent."

The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell is listed as Active production status, released on 2025-08-10, with a predecessor of Workstation Ada. The Intel Arc A350M is End-of-life, released on 2022-03-29, with no predecessor listed. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has a launch MSRP listed in the data.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell scores 106,087, which is 332.2% higher than the Intel Arc A350M’s 24,546.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A350M win any benchmark?

A: No. In the two shared head-to-head benchmarks (Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan), the Intel Arc A350M loses both. The win count is 2 for NVIDIA and 0 for Intel.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell has 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc A350M has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell has a TDP of 70 W and suggests a 250 W PSU. The Intel Arc A350M has a TDP of 25 W and has no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell has a transistor density of 121.0M / mm², while the Intel Arc A350M has 45.9M / mm². The NVIDIA part uses a 5 nm process, and the Intel part uses a 6 nm process.

Q: Are both GPUs in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both are in the 70th percentile of all GPUs. However, the NVIDIA part’s average benchmark score is 25,269, while the Intel part’s is 24,647.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell wins in every scenario that involves raw compute. Its 332.2% OpenCL advantage and 360.1% Vulkan advantage make it the definitive choice for GPU-accelerated rendering, machine learning inference, and high-fidelity gaming. The 17.03 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 16 GB of GDDR7 memory with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth support large textures, complex scenes, and multi-tasking. The 34 RT cores and 136 tensor cores provide hardware acceleration for ray tracing and AI workloads, which the Intel part lacks in tensor core form. The data indicates this is a workstation-class part with the performance to match.

The Intel Arc A350M’s only advantage is its power envelope. At 25 W TDP, it consumes significantly less power than the NVIDIA part’s 70 W. This makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermal limits are the primary constraints. Its higher base clock (1150 MHz) and boost clock (2200 MHz) suggest it can handle light tasks efficiently, but its 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 4 GB memory cap its potential. For users who need only basic graphics acceleration, web browsing, or light productivity, the Intel part suffices. However, the benchmark data shows that for any serious workload, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell is the only rational choice. The 2-0 head-to-head win count is the final word.