Intel Arc A380E vs NVIDIA B300 Comparison

The Intel Arc A380E and the NVIDIA B300 occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum. The A380E is a compact, power-efficient graphics card designed for embedded and entry-level visual workloads, while the B300 is a massive server accelerator built for high-performance computing and artificial intelligence. The recorded data shows a 77.0 TFLOPS difference in FP32 compute, a 4.10 TB/s difference in memory bandwidth, and a 138 GB difference in memory capacity. This analysis walks through the benchmark implications, architectural differences, and use-case splits based solely on the database entries.

FAQ

Q: What are the FP32 compute ratings of the two GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc A380E delivers 4.096 TFLOPS, while the NVIDIA B300 delivers 76.99 TFLOPS. The B300 is approximately 18.8 times higher in raw single-precision throughput.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have, and what type?

A: The Intel Arc A380E has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, yielding 186.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA B300 has 144 GB of HBM3e memory on a 4096-bit bus, yielding 4.10 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two cards?

A: The Arc A380E has a TDP of 75 W, while the B300 has a TDP of 1400 W. The B300 consumes 1325 W more, and its suggested PSU is 1800 W versus 250 W for the A380E.

Q: Which GPU has display outputs?

A: The Intel Arc A380E has 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The NVIDIA B300 has no outputs, indicating it is not intended for direct display connection.

Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?

A: The Arc A380E uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The B300 uses a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 104,000 million transistors.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The Arc A380E is end-of-life with a release date of 2024-03-31. The NVIDIA B300 is active with a release date of 2025-09-10.

The Verdict

The database positions these two products for entirely different roles. The Intel Arc A380E is a 75 W, single-slot card with a 250 W suggested PSU, 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, and a 254 mm length. It fits into embedded systems, compact workstations, or multi-display setups where power draw and physical footprint are primary constraints. Its 1024 shading units and 6 GB GDDR6 memory provide enough throughput for basic rendering, video output, and light compute tasks.

The NVIDIA B300 is a 1400 W SXM module with no display outputs, no listed API support, and a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface. Its 18,944 shading units, 592 tensor cores, 144 GB HBM3e, and 4.10 TB/s bandwidth indicate a server accelerator aimed at AI training, inference, and massive parallel compute. The data shows no benchmarks, no nearest rivals, and no wins for either product, so the verdict rests on specification differences. A user needing display output and low power should choose the Arc A380E. A user needing maximum compute throughput and memory capacity should choose the B300. There is no scenario where these two compete directly.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark array is empty in the database. There are no recorded measurements comparing the two GPUs directly, and both products have zero wins. However, the specification data provides quantitative deltas that indicate expected performance differences. The FP32 throughput difference is 72.894 TFLOPS in favor of the B300. The texture rate difference is 1,074.9 GTexel/s in favor of the B300. The pixel rate is the only metric where the A380E leads: 64.00 GPixel/s versus 48.77 GPixel/s, a 15.23 GPixel/s advantage.

The B300's memory bandwidth of 4.10 TB/s exceeds the A380E's 186.0 GB/s by 3.91 TB/s. The shading unit count differs by 17,920 units. The TMU count differs by 528 units. The B300 has 592 tensor cores; the A380E has none listed. The B300 supports FP16 at 1,231.8 TFLOPS with a 16:1 ratio, while the A380E supports FP16 at 8.192 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The B300's FP16 output is 1,223.61 TFLOPS higher. These deltas, while not from direct benchmark runs, show the scale of the performance gap.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs diverge on almost every measurable field. The Arc A380E uses the DG2-128 chip with Xe-HPG architecture, generation Alchemist (Arc 3). The B300 uses the GB110 chip with Blackwell Ultra architecture, generation Server Blackwell (Bxx). The A380E is built on TSMC's 6 nm process; the B300 uses TSMC's 5 nm process. Transistor counts differ by 96,800 million, with the B300 at 104,000 million and the A380E at 7,200 million. The A380E has a die size of 157 mm²; the B300 has no die size listed. Transistor density for the A380E is 45.9M per mm²; the B300 has no value recorded.

Clock speeds differ in both base and boost. The A380E runs at 2000 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost. The B300 runs at 1665 MHz base and 2032 MHz boost. The A380E has a 335 MHz higher base clock, but the B300 has a 32 MHz higher boost clock. Memory clocks also differ: the A380E uses 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective, while the B300 uses 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective. The memory bus width is 96 bits for the A380E versus 4096 bits for the B300. Memory size is 6 GB versus 144 GB. Memory type is GDDR6 versus HBM3e.

The A380E has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 RT cores. The B300 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 592 tensor cores. The B300 has no RT core count listed. The A380E has no tensor core count listed. Pixel rates are 64.00 GPixel/s for the A380E and 48.77 GPixel/s for the B300. Texture rates are 128.0 GTexel/s versus 1,202.9 GTexel/s. FP32 is 4.096 TFLOPS versus 76.99 TFLOPS. FP16 is 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 1,231.8 TFLOPS (16:1).

Power and physical characteristics show a stark contrast. The A380E has a TDP of 75 W, is single-slot, has no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The B300 has a TDP of 1400 W, is an SXM Module, has no power connector data, and a suggested PSU of 1800 W. The A380E is 254 mm long, 127 mm high, and 20 mm wide. The B300 has no dimensions listed. The A380E uses PCIe 4.0 x8; the B300 uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The A380E has 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs; the B300 has no outputs. The A380E lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4; the B300 lists no API support.

Architecture Differences

The architecture difference is fundamental. The A380E uses Xe-HPG, Intel's gaming and rendering architecture, on the Alchemist generation. It includes 8 RT cores for ray tracing, a full DirectX 12 Ultimate feature set, and a 2:1 FP16 ratio, indicating a graphics-first design. The B300 uses Blackwell Ultra, NVIDIA's server architecture, on the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation. It includes 592 tensor cores, a 16:1 FP16 ratio, and no display or graphics API support, indicating a compute-first design.

The process node difference is one generation apart: 6 nm for the A380E versus 5 nm for the B300. Both are fabricated by TSMC. The transistor count difference is enormous, with the B300 carrying 104,000 million transistors versus 7,200 million for the A380E. The B300 has no die size or transistor density listed, so a direct density comparison is not possible from the data. The A380E's 45.9M per mm² density reflects its smaller, older process design.

Memory architecture differs completely. The A380E uses a narrow 96-bit GDDR6 bus, which is typical for low-power consumer cards. The B300 uses a 4096-bit HBM3e bus, which is typical for high-bandwidth server accelerators. The bandwidth delta of 3.91 TB/s reflects this memory system difference. The B300's 144 GB capacity is 24 times the A380E's 6 GB.

The compute architecture also diverges in tensor capabilities. The B300's 592 tensor cores enable the 1,231.8 TFLOPS FP16 rating. The A380E has no tensor cores listed, and its FP16 output of 8.192 TFLOPS comes from a 2:1 ratio, meaning it uses the same hardware for FP16 and FP32 with a simple rate doubling. The B300's 16:1 ratio indicates specialized tensor hardware that accelerates FP16 far beyond its FP32 rate.

The A380E retains traditional graphics features: RT cores, display outputs, and graphics APIs. The B300 omits these entirely. The A380E's 32 ROPs exceed the B300's 24 ROPs, which is unusual but consistent with a card designed for rasterization output. The B300's 592 TMUs far exceed the A380E's 64 TMUs, indicating a texture-heavy compute pipeline.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380E wins in specific, narrow categories. It has a higher pixel rate at 64.00 GPixel/s versus 48.77 GPixel/s, a 15.23 GPixel/s advantage. It has a higher base clock at 2000 MHz versus 1665 MHz. It has more ROPs at 32 versus 24. It has display outputs, which the B300 lacks entirely. It has graphics API support, including DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. It has a much lower TDP at 75 W versus 1400 W, a lower suggested PSU at 250 W versus 1800 W, and a smaller physical footprint at 254 mm length. It is the only one of the two that can drive a monitor.

The NVIDIA B300 wins in every compute-heavy category. It has 18,944 shading units versus 1,024, a 17,920 unit advantage. It has 592 TMUs versus 64. It has 592 tensor cores versus none. It has 144 GB HBM3e versus 6 GB GDDR6. It has 4.10 TB/s bandwidth versus 186.0 GB/s. It has 76.99 TFLOPS FP32 versus 4.096 TFLOPS. It has 1,231.8 TFLOPS FP16 versus 8.192 TFLOPS. It has a 5 nm process versus 6 nm, a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface versus PCIe 4.0 x8, and a higher boost clock at 2032 MHz versus 2000 MHz.

The use-case split is clear. The A380E suits embedded systems, multi-display setups, and low-power rendering workloads. Its 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs and 75 W TDP make it a fit for digital signage, kiosks, or industrial visual output. The B300 suits server racks, AI training, and large-scale inference. Its 1400 W TDP and SXM form factor require a server chassis with 1800 W power delivery. The B300's 144 GB memory and 592 tensor cores are designed for models that exceed the A380E's 6 GB capacity by orders of magnitude. The data shows no overlap in target workloads, no shared benchmarks, and no direct competition. Each product wins in its designated domain.