Intel Arc A380E vs Intel Arc Pro B50 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core specifications of the Intel Arc A380E and the Intel Arc Pro B50?

A: The Arc A380E uses the DG2-128 chip with 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 RT cores. The Arc Pro B50 uses the BMG-G21 chip with 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 16 RT cores. The A380E has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, while the B50 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: How do the two cards compare in raw compute performance?

A: The Arc Pro B50 delivers 10.65 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 21.30 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1) performance. The Arc A380E delivers 4.096 TFLOPS of FP32 and 8.192 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1). The B50 is approximately 2.6 times higher in both FP32 and FP16 throughput.

Q: What are the clock speed differences between the two?

A: The Arc A380E has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz. The Arc Pro B50 has a base clock of 1700 MHz but a boost clock of 2600 MHz. The B50's boost clock is 600 MHz higher than the A380E's fixed clock.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each card?

A: The Arc A380E has a memory bandwidth of 186.0 GB/s, using 15.5 Gbps effective memory. The Arc Pro B50 has a bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s, using 14 Gbps effective memory. The B50 has 38 GB/s more bandwidth despite lower effective memory speed, due to its wider 128-bit bus.

Q: What benchmarks are recorded for the Arc Pro B50 in the database?

A: The B50 has scores in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (1604), PassMark DirectX 10 (58), DirectX 11 (100), DirectX 12 (64), DirectX 9 (144), G2D (717), G3D (12553), and GPU Compute (6037). The A380E has no recorded benchmark scores.

Q: What is the production status and release timing for each card?

A: The Arc A380E is end-of-life and was released on 2024-03-31. The Arc Pro B50 is active in production and was released on 2025-09-04. The B50's launch MSRP is 349 USD.

The Verdict

The data in the database indicates a clear performance hierarchy between these two Intel Arc products. The Arc Pro B50, with its newer Xe2-HPG architecture, 2,048 shading units, and 10.65 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, is the substantially stronger compute device. Its benchmark scores, including a PassMark G3D score of 12553 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1604, confirm it operates in a different performance class than the A380E, which has no recorded benchmark scores to compare.

The Arc A380E, by contrast, is an end-of-life product from the Alchemist generation. It offers a lower shading unit count (1,024 versus 2,048), roughly 2.6 times less FP32 throughput, and half the RT core count. Its 6 GB memory capacity is also smaller, which limits large dataset workloads. The A380E's only recorded advantages are a higher pixel rate (64.00 GPixel/s versus 41.60 GPixel/s) and a lower transistor density (45.9M per mm² versus 72.1M per mm²).

For users who need maximum compute throughput, higher memory capacity, and active production support, the Arc Pro B50 is the only defensible choice from the database. The A380E, being end-of-life and without any benchmark entries, cannot be recommended for compute-intensive tasks based on recorded data. The B50's percentile ranking of 17 versus all GPUs, while modest, still places it ahead of the A380E, which ranks at the 50th percentile but has zero average benchmark score.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two cards. However, the Arc Pro B50 has eight individual benchmark scores, while the Arc A380E has none. This absence of A380E scores means all comparative analysis must rely on the B50's recorded results and the architectural specifications of both cards.

The B50's PassMark G3D score of 12553 is its strongest recorded result, placing it in a usable range for general 3D rendering tasks. Its GPU Compute score of 6037 indicates moderate compute capability. The DirectX 11 score of 100 and DirectX 9 score of 144 show legacy API support, while DirectX 12 (64) and DirectX 10 (58) scores are lower.

In the nearest rivals data for the B50, the database lists the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 with an average score of 2662 and a delta of -0.1 percent, meaning the B50 is essentially tied with it. The NVIDIA Quadro K1100M scores 2664, a -0.2 percent delta, also effectively tied. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 scores 2645, a +0.6 percent delta, meaning the B50 is 0.6 percent ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER scores 2690, a -1.1 percent delta, meaning the B50 trails by 1.1 percent. These deltas are all within a narrow band, indicating the B50's average benchmark score of 2660 sits in a tightly clustered competitive range.

The A380E has no nearest rivals listed and no average benchmark score. Its percentile of 50 is higher than the B50's 17, but this percentile is likely based on specifications rather than measured performance, as the average score is zero.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measured specification. The Arc A380E uses a 6 nm process node, while the Arc Pro B50 uses a 5 nm node, both from TSMC. Transistor count jumps from 7,200 million on the A380E to 19,600 million on the B50, a 12,400 million transistor increase. Die size grows from 157 mm² to 272 mm², and transistor density rises from 45.9M per mm² to 72.1M per mm².

Memory configuration differs significantly. The A380E has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth. The B50 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. Memory speed is lower on the B50 at 14 Gbps effective versus 15.5 Gbps effective on the A380E.

Clock speeds show a different strategy. The A380E runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost. The B50 has a 1700 MHz base clock but boosts to 2600 MHz. This 900 MHz boost range gives the B50 dynamic performance headroom.

Compute unit counts differ: shading units double from 1,024 to 2,048, TMUs double from 64 to 128, and RT cores double from 8 to 16. However, ROPs decrease from 32 on the A380E to 16 on the B50. Pixel rate is higher on the A380E at 64.00 GPixel/s versus 41.60 GPixel/s on the B50. Texture rate is much higher on the B50 at 332.8 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s.

Power and physical design differ. The A380E has a TDP of 75 W and is single-slot, while the B50 has a 70 W TDP and is dual-slot. Both use no power connectors and suggest a 250 W PSU. The A380E is 254 mm long, 127 mm tall, and 20 mm wide. The B50 is 167 mm long, 69 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, making it shorter and narrower but thicker. The A380E uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the B50 uses PCIe 5.0 x8. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 2.0 on the A380E and 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 on the B50.

Architecture Differences

The Arc A380E is built on the Xe-HPG architecture and belongs to the Alchemist generation, specifically the Arc 3 tier. Its chip is DG2-128. The Arc Pro B50 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture from the Battlemage generation, with the BMG-G21 chip. This architectural jump represents a full generation change between the two products.

The process node improves from 6 nm to 5 nm, both from TSMC. Transistor density nearly doubles from 45.9M per mm² to 72.1M per mm², indicating a more compact and efficient design. The transistor count nearly triples from 7,200 million to 19,600 million.

The RT core count doubles from 8 to 16, suggesting improved ray tracing capability in the Xe2-HPG architecture. Shading units and TMUs both double, while ROPs halve, a design choice that favors texture throughput over pixel fill. The FP32 performance scales from 4.096 TFLOPS to 10.65 TFLOPS, and FP16 from 8.192 TFLOPS to 21.30 TFLOPS, both at a 2:1 ratio.

The B50's PCIe 5.0 x8 interface doubles the per-lane bandwidth of the A380E's PCIe 4.0 x8, though both offer eight lanes. The A380E uses DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the B50 uses mini-DisplayPort 2.1, a newer display standard. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The A380E lists Xe Graphics as its predecessor and Battlemage as its successor, confirming its place as the older product. The B50 has no predecessor or successor listed, positioning it as a standalone current-generation product. The A380E is end-of-life, while the B50 is active.

Where Each One Wins

Arc Pro B50 wins on compute throughput. The B50 delivers 10.65 TFLOPS FP32 and 21.30 TFLOPS FP16, versus 4.096 TFLOPS and 8.192 TFLOPS on the A380E. This more than doubles the compute capacity in both precision formats.

Arc Pro B50 wins on texture processing. With 128 TMUs and a texture rate of 332.8 GTexel/s, the B50 processes textures at more than 2.5 times the rate of the A380E's 64 TMUs and 128.0 GTexel/s. This favors games and applications that rely heavily on textured geometry.

Arc Pro B50 wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. The 16 GB frame buffer doubles the A380E's 6 GB, and the 224.0 GB/s bandwidth exceeds the A380E's 186.0 GB/s. Larger datasets, higher resolution textures, and compute workloads that spill into memory benefit from the B50's capacity.

Arc Pro B50 wins on ray tracing. The 16 RT cores double the A380E's 8 RT cores. The newer Xe2-HPG architecture also suggests improved ray tracing efficiency per core.

Arc A380E wins on pixel fill rate. The A380E's 64.00 GPixel/s exceeds the B50's 41.60 GPixel/s due to its 32 ROPs versus 16 ROPs. For fill-rate-bound workloads at lower resolutions, the A380E has an advantage.

Arc A380E wins on physical footprint. The A380E is single-slot, 254 mm long, 127 mm tall, and 20 mm wide. The B50 is dual-slot, 167 mm long, 69 mm tall, and 40 mm wide. The A380E occupies less slot width, though it is longer and taller.

Arc A380E wins on base clock stability. The A380E maintains a constant 2000 MHz for both base and boost clocks. The B50's base clock is 1700 MHz, meaning sustained workloads that prevent boosting will run slower on the B50.

Arc A380E wins on power efficiency per pixel. At 75 W TDP with 64.00 GPixel/s, the A380E delivers more pixel throughput per watt than the B50's 70 W TDP with 41.60 GPixel/s. The B50, however, delivers far more compute and texture throughput per watt.

Arc Pro B50 wins on production status. The B50 is active in production, while the A380E is end-of-life. This affects driver support longevity and availability of new units.

Arc Pro B50 wins on recorded benchmarks. The B50 has eight recorded scores across 3DMark and PassMark tests, while the A380E has none. The B50's average benchmark score of 2660 places it in a competitive range near the NVIDIA GT 1030 and Quadro K1100M.