Intel Arc A380E vs Intel Arc Graphics 32EU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data does not include any direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the Intel Arc A380E and the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU. The `headToHeadBenchmarks` list is empty, and neither item lists a shared benchmark score. This absence of overlapping test data is itself informative: it indicates that the two products have not been measured under identical conditions in the database, which is typical when one is a discrete add-in card and the other is an integrated graphics processor.

For the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU, a single benchmark result exists. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, it scored 733. This places the part at the 3rd percentile among all GPUs tracked in the database. Its nearest rivals in that test are the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU at 733 (0% delta), the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU at 733 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon HD 6470M at 723 (1.4% faster), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M at 751 (2.4% slower). The data shows a cluster of similarly performing parts around the 733-point mark, with the Arc Graphics 32EU sitting squarely in that group. The 1.4% advantage over the AMD Radeon HD 6470M and the 2.4% deficit against the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M are both small enough to be considered noise-level differences.

The Intel Arc A380E has no benchmark scores recorded in its entry. Its percentile rank is 50, which places it at the median of all GPUs in the database, but without a specific score or rival comparisons, the numeric performance picture for the A380E remains undefined in this dataset. The lack of measured results for the discrete card, combined with the single result for the integrated part, means the head-to-head comparison must rely on architectural specifications and theoretical throughput figures rather than empirical test scores.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural families and process nodes. The Intel Arc A380E uses the Xe-HPG architecture, built on TSMC's 6 nm process. It is part of the Alchemist generation, specifically Arc 3. The chip is designated DG2-128, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses the Xe-LPG architecture on TSMC's 3 nm node, part of the Arc Graphics-M generation tied to Arrow Lake. Its chip is labeled Arrow Lake-S, containing 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, for a density of 73.3 million per square millimeter. The newer node and higher density indicate a more compact logic design, though the integrated part shares the CPU die rather than being a standalone GPU.

The A380E is a discrete card with 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 raster output units, and 8 ray tracing cores. The Arc Graphics 32EU, as its name suggests, has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, with no dedicated ray tracing cores listed. The difference in execution resources is substantial: the A380E has four times the shading units and four times the TMUs, while matching the ROP count at 32 versus 8, which is still a 4:1 ratio. This translates directly into theoretical throughput. The A380E delivers 4.096 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 8.192 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1 ratio), with a pixel rate of 64.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 128.0 GTexel/s. The Arc Graphics 32EU produces 998.4 GFLOPS of FP32 and 1.997 TFLOPS of FP16, with 15.60 GPixel/s and 31.20 GTexel/s. The A380E is roughly four times faster in each of these metrics, consistent with the unit counts.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The A380E has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, with 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective). The Arc Graphics 32EU uses system shared memory, with size, type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent." This means the integrated GPU's performance is contingent on the host system's memory configuration, whereas the discrete card has dedicated VRAM with fixed bandwidth.

Clock behavior also separates the two. The A380E runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost, with no game clock specified. The Arc Graphics 32EU has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost of 1950 MHz, indicating a wide dynamic range typical of integrated parts that idle low and scale up under load. The boost clocks are close, but the A380E holds its frequency constantly, while the integrated part ramps from a very low base.

Power and physical design diverge sharply. The A380E has a 75 W TDP, is single-slot, uses no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. It measures 254 mm in length, 127 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. The Arc Graphics 32EU has a 65 W TDP, is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. It has no listed dimensions, as it resides on the CPU package. The bus interface for the A380E is PCIe 4.0 x8, while the integrated part uses a Ring Bus, connecting directly to the CPU's internal fabric.

Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Display outputs differ: the A380E has 4x DisplayPort 2.0, while the Arc Graphics 32EU's outputs are motherboard dependent.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Intel Arc A380E has 1,024 shading units, while the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU has 256, a 4:1 ratio in favor of the discrete card.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each?

A: The A380E uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc Graphics 32EU uses system shared memory, with bandwidth dependent on the host system.

Q: How do their compute capabilities compare?

A: The A380E delivers 4.096 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.192 TFLOPS FP16. The Arc Graphics 32EU delivers 998.4 GFLOPS FP32 and 1.997 TFLOPS FP16, approximately one quarter of the A380E's throughput.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The A380E is built on TSMC's 6 nm process, while the Arc Graphics 32EU uses TSMC's 3 nm process. The 3 nm node allows for higher transistor density: 73.3M per mm² versus 45.9M per mm².

Q: Does either support ray tracing?

A: The A380E has 8 dedicated ray tracing cores. The Arc Graphics 32EU lists no ray tracing cores in its specifications.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The A380E has a 75 W TDP and suggests a 250 W PSU. The Arc Graphics 32EU has a 65 W TDP and no separate PSU requirement, as it is integrated.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The A380E uses the Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm node, while the Arc Graphics 32EU uses Xe-LPG on a 3 nm node. Transistor counts are 7,200 million versus 17,800 million, and die sizes are 157 mm² versus 243 mm². Transistor density is 45.9M per mm² for the A380E and 73.3M per mm² for the integrated part.

Clock speeds: the A380E has base and boost both at 2000 MHz, with memory at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective). The Arc Graphics 32EU has a base of 300 MHz and boost of 1950 MHz, with system shared memory. Memory size is 6 GB GDDR6 for the A380E versus system shared for the integrated part. Bus widths are 96 bit versus system shared, and bandwidth is 186.0 GB/s versus system dependent.

Compute resources: shading units are 1024 versus 256, TMUs are 64 versus 16, ROPs are 32 versus 8, and ray tracing cores are 8 versus none. Pixel rates are 64.00 GPixel/s versus 15.60 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 128.0 GTexel/s versus 31.20 GTexel/s. FP32 is 4.096 TFLOPS versus 998.4 GFLOPS. FP16 is 8.192 TFLOPS versus 1.997 TFLOPS.

Power and physical specs: TDP is 75 W versus 65 W. The A380E is single-slot with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU. The Arc Graphics 32EU is an IGP with no slot width, no connectors, and no PSU suggestion. The A380E uses PCIe 4.0 x8; the integrated part uses Ring Bus. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 2.0 versus motherboard dependent. The A380E has dimensions of 254 mm x 127 mm x 20 mm; the Arc Graphics 32EU has none.

Production status and release dates differ: the A380E is end-of-life, released 2024-03-31, with a predecessor of Xe Graphics and successor of Battlemage. The Arc Graphics 32EU is active, released 2024-10-23, with a predecessor of HD Graphics-M and no successor listed. The A380E has no benchmark score; the Arc Graphics 32EU has a score of 733 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12.

The Verdict

The data indicates two products aimed at entirely different deployment scenarios. The Intel Arc A380E is a discrete, end-of-life card with 4x the shading units, 4x the texture rate, and 4x the FP32 throughput of the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU. It has dedicated 6 GB GDDR6 memory, 8 ray tracing cores, and a constant 2000 MHz clock. Its percentile rank of 50 places it at the median of all tracked GPUs, suggesting it is a mid-range part in the database's distribution.

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU is an active integrated GPU with 256 shading units, system shared memory, no ray tracing cores, and a wide clock range from 300 MHz to 1950 MHz. Its single benchmark score of 733 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 puts it at the 3rd percentile, meaning it sits near the bottom of the performance distribution. Its nearest rivals all score within 2.4% of 733, showing that the integrated part operates in a very low-performance tier.

Based strictly on recorded data, the A380E is the faster product by a wide margin, approximately 4x in raw compute metrics. The Arc Graphics 32EU's advantage lies in its integration: 65 W TDP, no additional power connectors, no separate PSU, and no physical card dimensions, making it suitable for compact, low-power systems where the A380E's 254 mm length and 250 W PSU suggestion would be impractical. The A380E is end-of-life and has no benchmark scores, while the Arc Graphics 32EU is active and has a measured result. Users requiring ray tracing, dedicated VRAM, and higher throughput should choose the A380E; users needing a low-power integrated solution with no add-in card requirements should choose the Arc Graphics 32EU.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380E wins on every raw performance metric recorded in the database. It has 4x the shading units, 4x the TMUs, 4x the ROPs, and 8 dedicated ray tracing cores versus none. Its FP32 throughput of 4.096 TFLOPS is more than 4x the 998.4 GFLOPS of the Arc Graphics 32EU. Its texture rate of 128.0 GTexel/s is similarly 4x the 31.20 GTexel/s. The dedicated 6 GB GDDR6 with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent memory performance, unlike the system dependent bandwidth of the integrated part. The constant 2000 MHz clock ensures no frequency variation under load, whereas the Arc Graphics 32EU's base clock of 300 MHz means it must ramp significantly to reach its 1950 MHz boost.

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU wins on integration and efficiency. Its 65 W TDP is lower than the A380E's 75 W, and it requires no separate power connectors or suggested PSU. As an IGP on a Ring Bus, it occupies no slot space and has no dimensions, making it viable for systems where a 254 mm card cannot fit. It uses system shared memory, which eliminates the need for dedicated VRAM allocation. Its 3 nm process node and higher transistor density (73.3M per mm² versus 45.9M per mm²) indicate a more modern manufacturing process, though this does not translate into higher performance in the recorded data. The Arc Graphics 32EU is active in production, while the A380E is end-of-life. Its benchmark result of 733, while low, is a measured data point, whereas the A380E has no recorded score.

In practical terms, the data suggests the A380E is for users who need discrete GPU performance with ray tracing and dedicated memory, accepting a larger physical footprint and higher system power requirements. The Arc Graphics 32EU is for users who need a minimal, low-power graphics solution integrated into the CPU, with no add-in card and no separate memory purchases. The performance gap is large, but the integration gap is equally large in the opposite direction.