Intel Arc A380E vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti AD104 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for the Intel Arc A380E against the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti AD104. The average benchmark score for both parts sits at zero, and neither card holds a percentile advantage over the other, with both resting at the 50th percentile across all GPUs in the database. This absence of measured wins in either direction means the comparison must be drawn from the architectural and specification differences rather than from direct performance deltas.

What the data does reveal is a stark contrast in raw compute capacity. The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 delivers 22.06 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the Arc A380E manages 4.096 TFLOPS. That places the NVIDIA part at roughly 5.4 times the single-precision floating point output of the Intel card. Texture rate follows a similar pattern, with the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 producing 344.8 GTexel/s against the Arc A380E's 128.0 GTexel/s, a 2.7x advantage. Pixel rate tells the same story: 121.7 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA card versus 64.00 GPixel/s for the Intel card, a 1.9x gap.

Memory bandwidth further widens the divide. The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 accesses 288.0 GB/s over a 128-bit bus, whereas the Arc A380E is limited to 186.0 GB/s across a 96-bit interface. The NVIDIA card also carries more memory capacity at 8 GB versus 6 GB. These recorded figures establish the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 as the dominant performer in every measured computational category, though the Arc A380E counters with a dramatically lower power envelope of 75 W compared to 160 W, and a smaller physical footprint at 254 mm length versus 240 mm for the NVIDIA card.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural lineages. Intel's Arc A380E uses the DG2-128 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, belonging to the Alchemist generation under the Arc 3 tier. NVIDIA's RTX 4060 Ti AD104 uses the AD104 chip on the Ada Lovelace architecture, part of the GeForce 40 series. Both are fabricated by TSMC, but on different nodes: the Intel part uses a 6 nm process, while the NVIDIA part uses 5 nm. The transistor counts reflect this gap, with the Arc A380E housing 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a density of 45.9M transistors per mm². The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 packs 35,800 million transistors onto a 294 mm² die for a density of 121.8M per mm², nearly 2.7 times the transistor density of the Intel chip.

Core configuration differences are substantial. The Arc A380E contains 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 raster operation pipelines, and 8 ray tracing cores. The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 scales this up to 4,352 shading units, 136 TMUs, 48 ROPs, and 34 RT cores. The NVIDIA part also integrates 136 tensor cores, a feature entirely absent from the Intel specification sheet. This tensor core presence enables the Ada Lovelace card to handle FP16 workloads at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, producing 22.06 TFLOPS of FP16 output. The Arc A380E achieves FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, delivering 8.192 TFLOPS, half of its FP32 rate.

Clock behavior differs as well. The Arc A380E runs a flat 2000 MHz base and boost clock, with no game clock listed. The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 operates at a 2310 MHz base clock and boosts to 2535 MHz, with memory running at 2250 MHz or 18 Gbps effective. The Intel card's memory runs at 1937 MHz, or 15.5 Gbps effective. Both cards share the same PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface and support identical API feature sets: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Physical and power characteristics also diverge. The Arc A380E is a single-slot card measuring 254 mm by 127 mm by 20 mm, requiring no power connectors and a suggested 250 W power supply. The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 is dual-slot, measuring 240 mm by 111 mm by 40 mm, requiring a single 16-pin connector and a suggested 450 W power supply. Display outputs differ markedly: the Intel card provides four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the NVIDIA card offers one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Both cards entered end-of-life status and share the same release date of March 31, 2024. The Intel card succeeded Xe Graphics and was followed by Battlemage; the NVIDIA card succeeded GeForce 30 and was followed by GeForce 50.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded specifications, the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 wins in every performance-oriented category. Its 22.06 TFLOPS FP32 output, 344.8 GTexel/s texture rate, and 121.7 GPixel/s pixel rate place it far ahead of the Arc A380E's 4.096 TFLOPS, 128.0 GTexel/s, and 64.00 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA card's 8 GB memory capacity and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth outclass the Intel card's 6 GB and 186.0 GB/s. The tensor core count of 136 versus none gives the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 a clear edge in any workload that can leverage AI acceleration, and its 34 RT cores compare favorably to the Arc A380E's 8.

The Arc A380E claims wins in efficiency and physical integration. Its 75 W TDP is less than half the RTX 4060 Ti AD104's 160 W, and its single-slot design with no power connectors allows installation in compact systems where the dual-slot, 16-pin-dependent NVIDIA card cannot fit. The Intel card's four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs exceed the NVIDIA card's single HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a configuration in terms of modern display connectivity. The Arc A380E is also shorter at 254 mm versus 240 mm? No, the data shows the Intel card is longer at 254 mm, while the NVIDIA card measures 240 mm. The Intel card is taller and thicker as well, at 127 mm height and 20 mm width versus 111 mm and 40 mm for the NVIDIA part. The NVIDIA card is thinner in height but thicker in width.

For workloads that demand maximum throughput, the RTX 4060 Ti AD104 is the clear choice. For deployments constrained by power budgets or requiring multiple DisplayPort 2.0 connections, the Arc A380E offers a viable alternative despite its lower compute ceiling.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti AD104 delivers 22.06 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the Intel Arc A380E provides 4.096 TFLOPS, a difference of roughly 5.4 times in favor of the NVIDIA card.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc A380E uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Arc A380E has a 75 W TDP, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W power supply. The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 has a 160 W TDP, requires one 16-pin connector, and suggests a 450 W power supply.

Q: Do both cards support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which card has more ray tracing cores?

A: The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 has 34 RT cores, compared to 8 RT cores on the Arc A380E.

Q: What display outputs does each card provide?

A: The Arc A380E offers four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 provides one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

The Verdict

The data points to a decisive performance advantage for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti AD104. Its higher shading unit count, greater memory bandwidth, larger memory pool, and tensor core support make it the stronger candidate for compute-intensive applications. The 22.06 TFLOPS FP32 figure against 4.096 TFLOPS, the 288.0 GB/s against 186.0 GB/s, and the 8 GB against 6 GB capacity all confirm this direction. Users who need maximum rendering throughput, ray tracing capability, or AI acceleration should select the RTX 4060 Ti AD104.

The Intel Arc A380E serves a different purpose. Its 75 W TDP, no power connector requirement, and suggested 250 W power supply make it suited for low-power or space-constrained builds. The four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs provide modern display connectivity that the NVIDIA card's HDMI 2.1 and DisplayPort 1.4a combination does not match. Users prioritizing power efficiency or multi-display setups with the latest DisplayPort standard may prefer the Arc A380E, accepting its lower compute ceiling. The shared release date and end-of-life status for both cards indicate they are contemporaneous products, but the recorded specifications place them in different performance tiers.