Intel Arc A380E vs Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc A380E and the Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero, and the wins tally for each product is zero. This absence of comparative measurements means the database cannot provide a direct performance delta between these two parts.

What the data does offer is a set of architectural and specification contrasts that define their respective roles. The Arc A380E delivers 4.096 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Data Center GPU Max Subsystem delivers 52.43 TFLOPS. That represents a 12.8x gap in raw single-precision throughput. In FP16, the gap narrows slightly in relative terms: the A380E reaches 8.192 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, while the Max Subsystem reaches 52.43 TFLOPS at 1:1, which is a 6.4x difference. The Max Subsystem maintains identical FP16 and FP32 rates, indicating it does not rely on packed math to boost half-precision work, whereas the A380E doubles its throughput when moving to FP16.

Texture rate tells a similar story. The Max Subsystem processes 1,638.4 GTexel/s against 128.0 GTexel/s for the A380E, a 12.8x margin. Pixel rate is a different matter entirely. The A380E produces 64.00 GPixel/s, while the Max Subsystem records 0 MPixel/s. This is not a competitive loss; it reflects that the Max Subsystem has no ROPs and no display outputs. The architecture simply does not rasterize to a screen. The A380E, with 32 ROPs, is designed for traditional rendering pipelines.

Memory bandwidth amplifies the divide. The A380E accesses 186.0 GB/s over a 96-bit GDDR6 bus, while the Max Subsystem accesses 3.21 TB/s over an 8192-bit HBM2e bus. That is roughly a 17.3x advantage in bandwidth. The capacity gap is even larger: 6 GB versus 128 GB, a 21.3x difference. These are not competing products in any measurable sense; the data indicates they serve fundamentally different workloads.

Where Each One Wins

Without benchmark scores, the wins must be inferred from specification differences and production status.

The Arc A380E wins in any scenario requiring display output. It provides 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the Max Subsystem provides no outputs. The A380E also carries a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, which is sufficient for its bandwidth needs, and it slots into a single-slot, 254 mm physical profile. Its 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it suitable for systems with a 250 W suggested PSU. It is an end-of-life product, which suggests it was positioned for embedded or low-profile graphics tasks.

The Max Subsystem wins in compute density. Its 16384 shading units, 128 ray tracing cores, and 1024 TMUs dwarf the A380E's 1024 shading units, 8 ray tracing cores, and 64 TMUs. The 128 GB HBM2e pool with 3.21 TB/s bandwidth is suited for large data residency, a capability the 6 GB A380E cannot approach. Its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface doubles the lane width and generation of the A380E's connection. The Max Subsystem remains active in production, while the A380E has been discontinued.

The data also shows a difference in API support. The A380E supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The Max Subsystem supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan entry recorded. For gaming or client workloads, the A380E has the more current feature set. For non-graphics compute, the Max Subsystem's raw throughput and memory capacity dominate.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different Intel architectures and foundries. The Arc A380E uses the DG2-128 chip built on Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist generation (Arc 3). It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, containing 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, for a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². Its base and boost clocks are both 2000 MHz, and its memory runs at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective).

The Data Center GPU Max Subsystem uses the Ponte Vecchio chip on Generation 12.5 architecture, part of the Data Center GPU (Ponte Vecchio) generation. It is built on Intel's 10 nm process, containing 100,000 million transistors across a 1280 mm² die, for a transistor density of 78.1M per mm². Its base clock is 900 MHz with a boost of 1600 MHz, and memory runs at 1565 MHz (3.1 Gbps effective).

The transistor count difference is stark: 100,000 million versus 7,200 million, a 13.9x gap. Die size differs by 8.1x, but the Max Subsystem still achieves a higher transistor density (78.1M versus 45.9M per mm²), indicating a denser design despite the older process node. The clock speeds invert the expectation: the smaller A380E runs at 2000 MHz, while the larger Max Subsystem boosts to only 1600 MHz. The A380E's higher clocks help it reach reasonable throughput despite far fewer cores.

Memory architecture is entirely different. The A380E uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus. The Max Subsystem uses 128 GB of HBM2e on an 8192-bit bus. The bus width difference is 85.3x, which explains how the Max Subsystem reaches 3.21 TB/s despite a memory clock of 1565 MHz versus the A380E's 1937 MHz.

Shading resources differ by 16x in shading units (16384 versus 1024), 16x in TMUs (1024 versus 64), and 16x in ray tracing cores (128 versus 8). The A380E has 32 ROPs; the Max Subsystem has 0. The Max Subsystem carries one 16-pin power connector and requires a 2800 W suggested PSU, while the A380E has no power connectors and needs only a 250 W suggested PSU. Physical dimensions also differ: the A380E is 254 mm long, 127 mm tall, and 20 mm wide; the Max Subsystem is 267 mm long with no recorded height or width. The Max Subsystem is dual-slot, the A380E is single-slot.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute?

A: The Data Center GPU Max Subsystem delivers 52.43 TFLOPS of FP32, compared to 4.096 TFLOPS for the Arc A380E, a 12.8x difference.

Q: Can the Data Center GPU Max Subsystem output video?

A: No. The Max Subsystem records no display outputs and 0 MPixel/s pixel rate. The Arc A380E provides 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs and a 64.00 GPixel/s pixel rate.

Q: How do the memory systems differ?

A: The Arc A380E uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Max Subsystem uses 128 GB of HBM2e on an 8192-bit bus with 3.21 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The Max Subsystem contains 100,000 million transistors, while the A380E contains 7,200 million. The Max Subsystem also has a higher transistor density at 78.1M per mm² versus 45.9M per mm².

Q: Which product is still in production?

A: The Data Center GPU Max Subsystem is listed as Active. The Arc A380E is listed as End-of-life.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The A380E supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Max Subsystem supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The A380E also lists Vulkan 1.4 support; the Max Subsystem has no Vulkan entry.

The Verdict

The data describes two products with no overlapping use cases. The Arc A380E is a 75 W, single-slot card with 4.096 TFLOPS FP32, 6 GB GDDR6, and four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. It is built for rendering to displays, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, and is end-of-life. The Data Center GPU Max Subsystem is a 2400 W, dual-slot compute accelerator with 52.43 TFLOPS FP32, 128 GB HBM2e, no display outputs, and no Vulkan support. It remains active in production.

For client-side graphics, display output, or any workload requiring a modern graphics API feature set, the A380E is the only viable option in this comparison. For large-scale compute, massive memory residency, or maximum throughput, the Max Subsystem is the only option. Neither product can substitute for the other. The benchmark data shows no direct comparison results, but the specification deltas are so large across every measurable dimension that a head-to-head would be meaningless.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Arc A380E | Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem |

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

| Chip | DG2-128 | Ponte Vecchio |

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Generation 12.5 |

| Generation | Alchemist (Arc 3) | Data Center GPU (Ponte Vecchio) |

| Process node | 6 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 100,000 million |

| Die size | 157 mm² | 1280 mm² |

| Transistor density | 45.9M / mm² | 78.1M / mm² |

| Base clock | 2000 MHz | 900 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2000 MHz | 1600 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1937 MHz 15.5 Gbps effective | 1565 MHz 3.1 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 6 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | HBM2e |

| Memory bus width | 96 bit | 8192 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 186.0 GB/s | 3.21 TB/s |

| Shading units | 1024 | 16384 |

| TMUs | 64 | 1024 |

| ROPs | 32 | 0 |

| Ray tracing cores | 8 | 128 |

| Pixel rate | 64.00 GPixel/s | 0 MPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 128.0 GTexel/s | 1,638.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.096 TFLOPS | 52.43 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) | 52.43 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 2400 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | None | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 2800 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.0 | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | null |

| Length | 254 mm 10 inches | 267 mm 10.5 inches |

| Height | 127 mm 5 inches | null |

| Width | 20 mm 0.8 inches | null |

| Production status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release date | 2024-03-31 | 2023-01-09 |

| Successor | Battlemage | H3C Graphics |