Intel Arc A380E vs Intel Arc A530M Comparison

The Intel Arc A380E and Intel Arc A530M are both built on the Xe-HPG architecture, but they target different segments: the A380E is a single-slot desktop card, while the A530M is a mobile integrated graphics processor. Their specifications and performance profiles diverge significantly despite sharing the same fundamental design language.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database data shows a decisive advantage for the Intel Arc A530M in available benchmark results. The A530M achieves a Geekbench OpenCL score of 49735 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 43492. These results place the mobile part at the 85th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 46614.

The Intel Arc A380E, in contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. Its average benchmark score is listed as 0, and its percentile versus all GPUs stands at 50. This absence of recorded data means a direct comparison of measured scores is not possible. The A530M's existing benchmarks, however, indicate a strong standing relative to its nearest rivals. It sits within 0.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 6550M (which scores 46702) and is exactly even with the AMD Radeon RX 5600M (46601). It leads the NVIDIA RTX A2000 by 1.2% and the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation by 1.4%.

The theoretical compute figures tell a different story. The A380E delivers 4.096 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, slightly edging out the A530M's 3.994 TFLOPS. The same pattern holds for FP16: the A380E produces 8.192 TFLOPS versus the A530M's 7.987 TFLOPS. The A380E also has a higher texture rate at 128.0 GTexel/s compared to 124.8 GTexel/s, and a higher pixel rate at 64.00 GPixel/s versus 62.40 GPixel/s. These figures suggest the desktop card has a marginal edge in raw throughput potential, but the mobile part's actual measured performance is superior.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A530M wins decisively in measured real-world performance based on the benchmarks present in the database. Its OpenCL and Vulkan scores demonstrate that the mobile chip delivers strong compute and graphics workloads in practice. The 85th percentile ranking places it well above the median GPU, and its nearest rival comparisons show it performing at parity with or slightly ahead of established mobile discrete GPUs from AMD and NVIDIA.

The Intel Arc A380E wins on theoretical specification ceilings. Its higher FP32 and FP16 throughput, combined with faster pixel and texture rates, indicate the desktop card's architecture is configured for higher peak output. The A380E also carries a higher base and boost clock of 2000 MHz, which contrasts sharply with the A530M's 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost. In scenarios where sustained raw compute is the sole criterion, the A380E's specifications suggest it could outperform the A530M, though no benchmark data confirms this.

The A530M further wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. It offers 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The A380E has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, resulting in 186.0 GB/s. For workloads that depend on large textures or data sets, the A530M's additional memory and wider bus provide a clear advantage.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs use the Xe-HPG architecture and are fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process node, but they employ different dies. The A380E uses the DG2-128 chip, which contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9 million per square millimeter. The A530M uses the larger DG2-256 chip, packing 11,500 million transistors into a 269 mm² die, for a density of 42.8 million per square millimeter.

The execution resources scale accordingly. The A380E features 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 render output units, and 8 ray tracing cores. The A530M increases these counts to 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, 48 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. The mobile part's larger chip provides 50% more shading units and 50% more ray tracing cores, which explains its superior benchmark performance despite lower clock speeds.

Memory architecture differs as well. The A380E uses a 96-bit memory bus, while the A530M uses a 128-bit bus. Both use GDDR6, but the A380E runs at an effective 15.5 Gbps, producing 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The A530M runs at a lower effective 14 Gbps but compensates with the wider bus to reach 224.0 GB/s. The power envelope also differs: the A380E has a TDP of 75 W and requires no power connectors, while the A530M has a 65 W TDP and is classified as an integrated graphics processor.

The A380E is a single-slot card measuring 254 mm in length, 127 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. It provides four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The A530M has no fixed dimensions and its display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, reflecting its mobile integration. Both support PCIe 4.0 x8, DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Intel Arc A530M has 1536 shading units, while the Intel Arc A380E has 1024 shading units.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The A530M delivers 224.0 GB/s via a 128-bit bus with 8 GB GDDR6, while the A380E provides 186.0 GB/s through a 96-bit bus with 6 GB GDDR6.

Q: What are the measured benchmark scores for each?

A: The A530M scores 49735 in Geekbench OpenCL and 43492 in Geekbench Vulkan. The A380E has no recorded benchmark scores in the database.

Q: Which chip has a higher transistor count?

A: The A530M's DG2-256 chip contains 11,500 million transistors, compared to the A380E's DG2-128 chip with 7,200 million transistors.

Q: Are the clock speeds different?

A: Yes. The A380E runs at a base and boost clock of 2000 MHz, while the A530M operates at a 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The A380E has a TDP of 75 W with a suggested power supply of 250 W, while the A530M has a TDP of 65 W and no suggested power supply listed.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc A380E | Intel Arc A530M |

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

| Chip | DG2-128 | DG2-256 |

| Generation | Alchemist (Arc 3) | Alchemist (Arc 5 Mobile) |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 11,500 million |

| Die Size | 157 mm² | 269 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 45.9M / mm² | 42.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2000 MHz | 900 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2000 MHz | 1300 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 96 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 186.0 GB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 64 | 96 |

| ROPs | 32 | 48 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 8 | 12 |

| Pixel Rate | 64.00 GPixel/s | 62.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 128.0 GTexel/s | 124.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 4.096 TFLOPS | 3.994 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) | 7.987 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 65 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | Not specified |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | Not specified |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.0 | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions | 254 mm x 127 mm x 20 mm | Not specified |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2024-03-31 | 2023-07-31 |

| Predecessor | Xe Graphics | Not specified |

| Successor | Battlemage | Not specified |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 50 | 85 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 0 | 46614 |