Intel Arc A380E vs Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for the Intel Arc A380E versus the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero and an empty benchmark array. This means a direct performance comparison cannot be expressed in measured frame rates, synthetic scores, or compute throughput from the recorded data. The absence of benchmark numbers should not be interpreted as parity; it reflects a lack of recorded measurements in the database at this time.

What can be compared directly from the specification data is raw compute throughput. The Intel Arc A380E delivers 4.096 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile delivers 2.355 TFLOPS. That places the A380E approximately 74% ahead in peak FP32 throughput. In FP16, the A380E reaches 8.192 TFLOPS compared to 4.710 TFLOPS for the mobile part, a lead of roughly 74% as well. These figures are theoretical peak rates, not application-level results, but they establish the relative ceiling for compute-heavy workloads.

Texture and pixel throughput follow the same pattern. The A380E achieves 128.0 GTexel/s and 64.00 GPixel/s, while the mobile part achieves 73.60 GTexel/s and 36.80 GPixel/s. The A380E is therefore about 74% faster in texture rate and 74% faster in pixel rate. These ratios are consistent because the shading unit, texture mapping unit, and render output unit counts scale proportionally between the two parts.

Clock behavior differs substantially. The A380E runs at a fixed 2000 MHz for both base and boost, with no dynamic range. The mobile part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2300 MHz. The mobile chip can exceed the A380E's clock speed by 300 MHz at boost, but its base clock is drastically lower. The actual sustained clock in a portable device depends on thermal and power constraints, which the database does not record. The A380E's locked 2000 MHz suggests a stable, predictable operating point, whereas the mobile part's wide clock range indicates aggressive power management.

Memory bandwidth is a decisive separation point. The A380E uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, yielding 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The mobile part uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent. No numerical bandwidth figure exists for the shared-memory configuration. Dedicated GDDR6 on the A380E avoids contention with the CPU for memory access, which typically benefits sustained workloads. The mobile part's shared memory bandwidth is variable and tied to the host platform's memory subsystem, so its effective throughput cannot be stated from the database.

Both parts sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database. That percentile equivalence is a coarse ranking, not a performance equality claim. The A380E is an end-of-life discrete card, while the mobile part is an active integrated graphics processor. Their percentile ranks match despite vastly different specifications, likely because the database percentile is based on the same zero-score benchmark data.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380E wins on every quantified compute metric in the specification set. It has double the shading units at 1024 versus 512, double the texture mapping units at 64 versus 32, double the render output units at 32 versus 16, and double the ray tracing cores at 8 versus 4. It also has a higher FP32 throughput at 4.096 TFLOPS versus 2.355 TFLOPS, a higher FP16 throughput at 8.192 TFLOPS versus 4.710 TFLOPS, higher pixel rate at 64.00 GPixel/s versus 36.80 GPixel/s, and higher texture rate at 128.0 GTexel/s versus 73.60 GTexel/s.

The A380E also wins on memory architecture. It has 6 GB of dedicated GDDR6 with 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the mobile part relies on system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. For workloads that repeatedly access large data sets, such as texture-heavy rendering or compute kernels that reuse buffers, dedicated memory with fixed bandwidth provides a more consistent resource.

The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile wins on power efficiency and physical integration. Its TDP is 25 W, one third of the A380E's 75 W. It is an integrated graphics processor with no slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU rating. The A380E requires a single-slot card, a 250 W suggested PSU, and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The mobile part uses the IGP bus interface and consumes far less power, making it suitable for portable devices where the A380E's discrete card form factor would not fit.

The mobile part also wins on process technology. It uses Intel's 3 nm node, while the A380E uses TSMC's 6 nm node. The database does not record transistor counts or die sizes for the mobile chip, so density comparisons cannot be made. The smaller node gives the mobile part a theoretical efficiency advantage, which aligns with its much lower TDP.

Clock speed is a mixed category. The mobile part has a higher boost clock at 2300 MHz versus 2000 MHz for the A380E. However, its base clock is only 300 MHz. The A380E maintains 2000 MHz across both base and boost. The mobile part can win in short bursts if thermal headroom allows boost clocks near 2300 MHz, but sustained performance is uncertain.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectures and generations. The Intel Arc A380E uses the DG2-128 chip based on Xe-HPG architecture, belonging to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses the Panther Lake chip based on Xe3-LPG architecture, belonging to the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation. This is a generational leap from Alchemist to Xe3-LPG.

Process nodes differ by manufacturer and size. The A380E is built on TSMC's 6 nm process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The mobile part is built on Intel's 3 nm process, with transistor count and die size listed as unknown. The process node difference explains part of the power envelope gap: 75 W for the A380E versus 25 W for the mobile part.

Execution resource counts scale exactly by a factor of two. The A380E has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. The mobile part has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores. This halving of resources combined with a 3 nm process allows the mobile part to deliver roughly 57% of the A380E's FP32 throughput while consuming one third of the power.

Memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The A380E has a dedicated 6 GB GDDR6 pool on a 96-bit bus with 1937 MHz memory clock, 15.5 Gbps effective, producing 186.0 GB/s bandwidth. The mobile part uses system shared memory for capacity, type, and bus width, with bandwidth listed as system dependent. The A380E's memory clock is fixed, while the mobile part's memory performance depends entirely on the host system's memory configuration.

API support is identical. Both parts list DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. No difference in API feature levels exists in the recorded data. This means software written to these API versions should run on both, though performance will differ based on the resource gaps described above.

Physical and integration characteristics diverge completely. The A380E is a single-slot card measuring 254 mm by 127 mm by 20 mm, with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. It uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface and outputs to 4x DisplayPort 2.0. The mobile part is an IGP with no dimensions, no power connectors, no suggested PSU, no dedicated display outputs (portable device dependent), and an IGP bus interface. The A380E is end-of-life with a release date of 2024-03-31, while the mobile part is active with a release date of 2026-01-26. The A380E's predecessor is Xe Graphics and its successor is Battlemage; the mobile part lists no predecessor or successor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute throughput?

A: The Intel Arc A380E delivers 4.096 TFLOPS of FP32, while the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile delivers 2.355 TFLOPS. The A380E is approximately 74% higher in peak FP32 throughput.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each GPU have?

A: The A380E has 186.0 GB/s from 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus. The mobile part uses system shared memory with bandwidth listed as system dependent, so no fixed bandwidth figure is recorded.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The A380E has a TDP of 75 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W, with no power connectors. The mobile part has a TDP of 25 W, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Which part has more shading units?

A: The A380E has 1024 shading units. The mobile part has 512 shading units, exactly half the count.

Q: Are the API feature levels different?

A: No. Both GPUs list DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the production status of each?

A: The A380E is end-of-life and was released on 2024-03-31. The mobile part is active and was released on 2026-01-26.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear separation of roles. The Intel Arc A380E is the stronger compute device on every quantified metric. It doubles the execution resources, delivers 74% more FP32 throughput, offers dedicated 6 GB GDDR6 memory with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth, and maintains a fixed 2000 MHz clock. It is a single-slot discrete card with 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs and a 75 W TDP. For scenarios that require sustained throughput, dedicated memory bandwidth, and fixed display outputs, the A380E is the superior choice based on specifications.

The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is the efficiency-focused integrated part. It consumes 25 W, uses a 3 nm process, and has a boost clock of 2300 MHz. Its shared memory architecture makes its bandwidth system dependent, and its display outputs depend on the portable device. It has half the shading units, TMUs, ROPs, and ray tracing cores of the A380E. Its role is constrained to portable systems where the A380E's discrete card form factor, 254 mm length, and 250 W suggested PSU are not feasible.

The database contains no benchmark scores for either GPU, so application-level performance cannot be ranked. The 50th percentile ranking for both parts is based on zero recorded benchmark scores and carries no comparative weight. Buyers or integrators choosing between these two should base decisions on the structural specifications: the A380E for dedicated graphics workloads with fixed memory and outputs, the mobile part for low-power integrated use in portable devices. The data does not support a single winner across all contexts.