Intel Arc A370M vs NVIDIA TITAN RTX Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in raw compute benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN RTX leads decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 144,858 versus 29,676 for the Intel Arc A370M, a 388.1% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the TITAN RTX scores 136,073 against 28,673, a 374.6% lead.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The TITAN RTX averages 31,676 across all recorded tests, placing it in the 76th percentile of all GPUs. The Arc A370M averages 29,175, placing it in the 74th percentile. The gap in average score is roughly 8.6%.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The TITAN RTX offers 672.0 GB/s over a 384-bit bus, while the Arc A370M provides 112.0 GB/s over a 64-bit bus. This sixfold difference in bandwidth aligns with the compute performance gap.

Q: Are both GPUs DirectX 12 Ultimate compatible?

A: Yes. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. API compatibility is identical, so differences in performance are not due to feature-level limitations.

Q: What is the thermal design power difference?

A: The TITAN RTX is rated at 280 W, while the Arc A370M is rated at 35 W. The TITAN RTX is a dual-slot desktop card requiring 2x 8-pin connectors, whereas the Arc A370M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no separate power connectors.

Q: How do the nearest rivals compare to each GPU?

A: For the TITAN RTX, the closest rival is the Intel Arc Pro A30M at 31,894 average score, which is 0.7% higher. For the Arc A370M, the closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH at 29,197, which is 0.1% higher.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is substantial. The NVIDIA TITAN RTX uses the Turing architecture on a 12 nm TSMC process, featuring the TU102 chip with 18,600 million transistors on a 754 mm² die. The Intel Arc A370M employs the Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process, using the DG2-128 chip with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. Transistor density tells the story of process efficiency: the Intel chip packs 45.9 million transistors per square millimeter, while the NVIDIA chip achieves 24.7 million per square millimeter.

The compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The TITAN RTX contains 4,608 shading units, 288 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. It also includes 72 RT cores and 576 tensor cores. The Arc A370M has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with 8 RT cores and no tensor cores. This disparity in execution resources explains why the TITAN RTX reaches 16.31 TFLOPS FP32 and 32.62 TFLOPS FP16, while the Arc A370M achieves 4.198 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.397 TFLOPS FP16.

Memory architecture is another clear differentiator. The TITAN RTX carries 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 672.0 GB/s. The Arc A370M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, providing 112.0 GB/s. Both run their memory at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective data rate, but the bus width difference creates a massive bandwidth gap. Pixel rate and texture rate follow suit: the TITAN RTX outputs 169.9 GPixel/s and 509.8 GTexel/s, versus 65.60 GPixel/s and 131.2 GTexel/s for the Arc A370M.

The TITAN RTX relies on PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Arc A370M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The newer interface standard on the Intel part offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but the x8 link width limits total throughput compared to the NVIDIA card's full x16 connection. Display outputs also reflect their intended markets: the TITAN RTX provides 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C, while the Arc A370M's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," indicating its mobile laptop integration.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two shared benchmark tests are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and both reveal overwhelming NVIDIA dominance. In OpenCL, the TITAN RTX scores 144,858 against 29,676 for the Arc A370M. The delta is 388.1%, meaning the TITAN RTX is nearly five times faster in this compute workload. In Vulkan, the scores are 136,073 versus 28,673, a delta of 374.6%. Both tests confirm that the TITAN RTX's massive shading core count and memory bandwidth translate directly into compute throughput.

The win tally in the head-to-head section stands at 2 wins for the TITAN RTX and 0 for the Arc A370M. No test in the shared set favors the Intel part. This outcome is consistent with the hardware specifications, as the TITAN RTX offers roughly four times the shading units, nine times the RT cores, and six times the memory bandwidth.

Context from the database's nearest rival data adds perspective. The TITAN RTX's average score of 31,676 sits just 0.7% below the Intel Arc Pro A30M (31,894), a mobile professional GPU. It is 0.5% above the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (31,532) and 1.5% above both the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q and Quadro M5000 (31,220 and 31,206 respectively). The Arc A370M's average of 29,175 trails the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH (29,197) by 0.1%, sits level with the AMD FirePro W8000 (29,211), and leads the AMD Radeon RX 470 (28,996) by 0.6% and the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (28,874) by 1%.

These rival comparisons indicate that the Arc A370M, despite being a mobile IGP, performs in the same average-score band as several desktop and high-end mobile GPUs from older generations. The TITAN RTX, by contrast, operates in a higher performance tier, though its nearest rivals show that it is not the absolute top of the database's rankings.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA TITAN RTX | Intel Arc A370M |

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

| Architecture | Turing | Xe-HPG |

| Generation | GeForce 20 | Alchemist (Arc 3 Mobile) |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 18,600 million | 7,200 million |

| Die Size | 754 mm² | 157 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.7M / mm² | 45.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1350 MHz | 1550 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1770 MHz | 2050 MHz |

| Memory Size | 24 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 672.0 GB/s | 112.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4608 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 288 | 64 |

| ROPs | 96 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 72 | 8 |

| Tensor Cores | 576 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 169.9 GPixel/s | 65.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 509.8 GTexel/s | 131.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 16.31 TFLOPS | 4.198 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 32.62 TFLOPS (2:1) | 8.397 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 280 W | 35 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | None |

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

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions | 267 mm x 116 mm x 35 mm | Not specified |

| Release Date | 2018-12-17 | 2022-03-29 |

| Launch MSRP | 2,499 USD | Not specified |

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA TITAN RTX wins in every measurable compute benchmark shared between the two GPUs. Its 388.1% OpenCL advantage and 374.6% Vulkan advantage make it the clear choice for GPU-accelerated compute workloads, including scientific simulation, machine learning inference, and heavy 3D rendering. The 24 GB memory capacity and 672.0 GB/s bandwidth allow it to handle large datasets and multi-GPU workloads without hitting memory ceilings. The 576 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for AI and deep learning tasks, a resource completely absent from the Arc A370M. For desktop workstations with adequate power delivery, the 280 W TITAN RTX remains a capable compute accelerator despite its end-of-life status.

The Intel Arc A370M wins in efficiency and portability. Its 35 W TDP means it can operate in thin-and-light laptops without external power connectors, and its IGP form factor requires no expansion slot. The 6 nm process and 45.9M transistors per mm² density demonstrate modern manufacturing efficiency, allowing Intel to pack meaningful performance into a 157 mm² die. For laptop users needing basic DirectX 12 Ultimate support, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6, the Arc A370M delivers contemporary API compatibility in a low-power package. Its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface suggests it can take advantage of modern laptop platforms' newer I/O standards.

The use-case split is clear. The TITAN RTX targets desktop workstations with high compute demands, abundant power, and large memory requirements. The Arc A370M serves mobile systems where battery life and thermal limits take priority over raw performance. The benchmark data shows that in raw throughput, the TITAN RTX is in a different league, but the Arc A370M's efficiency profile makes it suitable for a different class of device. Neither GPU can substitute for the other in their respective intended environments.