AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT vs Intel Arc A380E Comparison

AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT and Intel Arc A380E represent two very different approaches to the discrete GPU market. The RX 7600 XT is a high-throughput, large-memory adapter built on AMD’s RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the Arc A380E is a low-power, compact Intel solution based on Xe-HPG. The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap in favor of the AMD part, but the Intel card holds specific advantages in physical footprint, power draw, and display output configuration that matter for certain embedded or multi-display deployments.

FAQ

Q: How does the average benchmark score of the RX 7600 XT compare to the Arc A380E?

A: The RX 7600 XT has an average benchmark score of 17083, while the Arc A380E has an average benchmark score of 0, indicating no recorded average performance data for the Intel card in the database.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 7600 XT ships with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Arc A380E has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, providing 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The RX 7600 XT boosts to 2755 MHz. The Arc A380E has a boost clock of 2000 MHz, which is also its base clock.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RX 7600 XT has a TDP of 190 W and requires a 450 W suggested power supply, using a single 8-pin power connector. The Arc A380E has a TDP of 75 W, requires no power connectors, and runs on a 250 W suggested power supply.

Q: Are both cards compatible with DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Yes, both the RX 7600 XT and the Arc A380E support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), along with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The RX 7600 XT is listed as Active, with a release date of 2024-01-23. The Arc A380E is listed as End-of-life, with a release date of 2024-03-31.

Architecture Differences

The RX 7600 XT uses the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish, and belongs to the Navi III (RX 7000) generation. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, integrating 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The Arc A380E uses the DG2-128 chip with Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. It is also built on a 6 nm TSMC process but contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9M per mm².

Compute resources differ substantially. The RX 7600 XT carries 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation pipelines. It also includes 32 ray tracing cores and has no tensor cores listed. The Arc A380E has exactly half the shading units at 1024, half the TMUs at 64, and half the ROPs at 32. Intel’s card includes 8 ray tracing cores. This halving of core resources explains why the AMD card achieves a pixel rate of 176.3 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 352.6 GTexel/s, whereas the Intel card reaches only 64.00 GPixel/s and 128.0 GTexel/s.

Clock behavior also differs. The RX 7600 XT has a base clock of 1980 MHz, a game clock of 2470 MHz, and a boost clock of 2755 MHz. The Arc A380E runs at a fixed 2000 MHz for both base and boost, with no game clock listed. Memory configuration is another separator: the AMD card runs GDDR6 at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), while the Intel card runs GDDR6 at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective). The RX 7600 XT’s FP32 throughput is 22.57 TFLOPS with FP16 at 22.57 TFLOPS in a 1:1 ratio. The Arc A380E delivers 4.096 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.192 TFLOPS FP16 in a 2:1 ratio, indicating a different compute priority.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7600 XT wins in raw rendering performance, memory capacity, bandwidth, and compute throughput. Its 16 GB frame buffer is more than double the 6 GB of the Arc A380E, and its 288.0 GB/s bandwidth is roughly 55% higher than the 186.0 GB/s of the Intel part. The 22.57 TFLOPS FP32 rating places it in a different performance class than the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Arc A380E. The RX 7600 XT also has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs at 60, compared to 50 for the Arc A380E.

The Arc A380E wins in power efficiency and physical integration. Its 75 W TDP is less than half the 190 W TDP of the RX 7600 XT, and it requires no external power connectors. The suggested power supply for the Intel card is 250 W versus 450 W for the AMD card. The Arc A380E is a single-slot card with a width of 20 mm (0.8 inches), while the RX 7600 XT is dual-slot. The Intel card is longer at 254 mm (10 inches) versus 204 mm (8 inches) for the AMD card, and taller at 127 mm (5 inches) versus 115 mm (4.5 inches). For display output, the Arc A380E provides four DisplayPort 2.0 connections, while the RX 7600 XT offers one HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1 connections. The Intel card’s four identical outputs suit multi-display setups without adapter requirements.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs:

• Shading Units: 2048 (RX 7600 XT) vs 1024 (Arc A380E)
• TMUs: 128 vs 64
• ROPs: 64 vs 32
• Ray Tracing Cores: 32 vs 8
• Base Clock: 1980 MHz vs 2000 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2755 MHz vs 2000 MHz
• Game Clock: 2470 MHz vs none
• Memory Clock: 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) vs 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective)
• Memory Size: 16 GB vs 6 GB
• Memory Bus: 128 bit vs 96 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 288.0 GB/s vs 186.0 GB/s
• Pixel Rate: 176.3 GPixel/s vs 64.00 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 352.6 GTexel/s vs 128.0 GTexel/s
• FP32: 22.57 TFLOPS vs 4.096 TFLOPS
• FP16: 22.57 TFLOPS (1:1) vs 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 190 W vs 75 W
• Slot Width: Dual-slot vs Single-slot
• Power Connectors: 1x 8-pin vs None
• Suggested PSU: 450 W vs 250 W
• Display Outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 vs 4x DisplayPort 2.0
• Transistors: 13,300 million vs 7,200 million
• Die Size: 204 mm² vs 157 mm²
• Transistor Density: 65.2M / mm² vs 45.9M / mm²
• Length: 204 mm (8 inches) vs 254 mm (10 inches)
• Height: 115 mm (4.5 inches) vs 127 mm (5 inches)
• Width: none vs 20 mm (0.8 inches)
• Production Status: Active vs End-of-life
• Release Date: 2024-01-23 vs 2024-03-31
• Predecessor: Navi II vs Xe Graphics
• Successor: Navi IV vs Battlemage

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between these two GPUs. However, the RX 7600 XT has individual benchmark scores that can be contextualized. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RX 7600 XT scores 2348. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 92426, and in Geekbench Vulkan, 48366. Passmark results for the AMD card are as follows: DirectX 10 scores 85, DirectX 11 scores 167, DirectX 12 scores 65, DirectX 9 scores 228, G2D scores 1030, G3D scores 17132, and GPU compute scores 8987. The Arc A380E has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so direct numerical comparison is limited to the AMD card’s absolute results and its position relative to other GPUs.

The RX 7600 XT’s average benchmark score of 17083 places it close to several rivals in the database. It is 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690, which has an average score of 17037, and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 7970M at 17019. It trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 by 0.7%, as that card averages 17208, and leads the NVIDIA Tesla M4 by 0.9%, with the Tesla M4 at 16932. These narrow deltas indicate that the RX 7600 XT sits in a tightly contested performance band, despite its modern architecture and large memory buffer.

The lack of benchmark data for the Arc A380E means the database cannot assign it a comparative score against the RX 7600 XT. Its percentile ranking of 50 versus the RX 7600 XT’s 60 suggests that, based on the database’s overall GPU population, the AMD card is positioned higher. The Arc A380E’s FP32 throughput of 4.096 TFLOPS is about 18% of the RX 7600 XT’s 22.57 TFLOPS, and its texture rate of 128.0 GTexel/s is about 36% of the AMD card’s 352.6 GTexel/s. These raw compute metrics reinforce the performance hierarchy indicated by the missing benchmark entries.

The Verdict

The RX 7600 XT is the clear choice for rendering workloads that demand high frame rates, large textures, or GPU compute throughput. Its 16 GB memory capacity, 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 22.57 TFLOPS FP32 performance place it in a different tier than the Arc A380E. The AMD card’s 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, combined with a boost clock of 2755 MHz, deliver pixel and texture rates that the Intel part cannot approach. The recorded benchmark scores for the RX 7600 XT, including a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2348 and a Passmark G3D score of 17132, provide measurable evidence of its capability. Its percentile rank of 60 among all GPUs, alongside rival deltas within 1% of the NVIDIA RTX 3070, confirms that it competes in the upper mid-range segment.

The Arc A380E is suited to environments where power draw and physical size are the primary constraints. Its 75 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of power connectors allow installation in compact systems that cannot accommodate a 190 W dual-slot card. The four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs give it an advantage in multi-display configurations that require identical output types. However, its 6 GB memory, 96-bit bus, and 4.096 TFLOPS FP32 performance limit its applicability to lighter graphics tasks. The database lists the Arc A380E as end-of-life, which may affect long-term availability, while the RX 7600 XT remains active in production.

For users who need maximum graphics performance in a desktop GPU, the RX 7600 XT is the only viable option between these two. For embedded or low-power systems where the graphics load is modest and four DisplayPort outputs are required, the Arc A380E has a defined role. The data does not show any scenario where the Intel card outperforms the AMD card in raw compute or memory performance. The RX 7600 XT leads in every measured rendering metric, and the Arc A380E leads only in power efficiency, slot occupancy, and display output count.