Intel Arc A380E vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER Comparison

Intel Arc A380E and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, yet both are now listed as end-of-life products in the database. The A380E is a low-power entry point into Intel's Arc 3 lineup, while the RTX 4080 SUPER represents the upper tier of NVIDIA's GeForce 40 series. Direct head-to-head benchmark results are not recorded in the database, so the comparison relies on the RTX 4080 SUPER's comprehensive benchmark suite and the architectural specifications of both parts. The data indicates a massive performance gulf, but also reveals distinct design philosophies and use cases for each GPU.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the Intel Arc A380E and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER. The A380E has no recorded benchmark scores, leaving its average benchmark score at zero. This absence of data means the comparison must be inferred from the RTX 4080 SUPER's standalone results and the theoretical throughput figures listed for both cards.

The RTX 4080 SUPER delivers strong results across the recorded test suite. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score reaches 6600, a demanding modern workload. In Geekbench, the card posts 219065 in OpenCL and 260075 in Vulkan, showing particular strength in the Vulkan API. Passmark results show a G3D score of 34245 and a GPU compute score of 19822. The card also records legacy DirectX tests: 193 in DX10, 301 in DX11, 134 in DX12, and 381 in DX9, alongside a G2D score of 1270.

The A380E has no comparable scores, so no delta percentages can be calculated. The RTX 4080 SUPER's average benchmark score of 54209 places it at the 86th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals show how tightly clustered this performance tier is: the RTX 4080 scores 54247, a delta of -0.1 percent, the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54828, a delta of -1.1 percent, the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 55698, a delta of -2.7 percent, and the AMD Radeon 8060S scores 55757, a delta of -2.8 percent. The RTX 4080 SUPER sits within a few percentage points of these cards, indicating that its performance level is well established.

Given the lack of A380E benchmarks, the performance difference is best expressed through raw throughput figures. The RTX 4080 SUPER's FP32 compute of 52.22 TFLOPS is roughly 12.7 times the A380E's 4.096 TFLOPS. Texture rate tells a similar story: 816.0 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s, a factor of about 6.4. Pixel rate differs by a factor of about 4.5, with the RTX 4080 SUPER at 285.6 GPixel/s and the A380E at 64.00 GPixel/s. These are theoretical peaks, but they align with the absence of any recorded wins for the A380E in the head-to-head data.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations with distinct design goals. Intel's A380E uses the DG2-128 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist generation under the Arc 3 branding. NVIDIA's RTX 4080 SUPER uses the AD103 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture in the GeForce 40 series.

The manufacturing process differs by one nanometer node. Intel uses TSMC's 6 nm process for the A380E, while NVIDIA uses TSMC's 5 nm process for the RTX 4080 SUPER. Die size and transistor counts reveal the scale difference. The A380E packs 7,200 million transistors into a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The RTX 4080 SUPER integrates 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, reaching 121.1M per mm². NVIDIA's chip is roughly 2.4 times larger in area but holds over six times as many transistors, with a density advantage of about 2.6 times.

Compute resources diverge sharply. The A380E has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 10240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, which are 10 times, 5 times, and 3.5 times the A380E's counts respectively. Ray tracing hardware also scales: the A380E has 8 RT cores, while the RTX 4080 SUPER has 80. Tensor cores are present only on the NVIDIA card, with 320 units; the A380E lists none.

Memory architecture differs in capacity, type, and bandwidth. The A380E carries 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, yielding 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 736.3 GB/s. That is nearly four times the bandwidth despite only a 2.7 times increase in bus width, owed to the faster GDDR6X memory at 23 Gbps effective versus 15.5 Gbps effective on the A380E. Clock speeds also differ: the A380E runs at a fixed 2000 MHz base and boost, while the RTX 4080 SUPER boosts to 2550 MHz from a 2295 MHz base. Memory clocks are 1937 MHz for the A380E and 1438 MHz for the RTX 4080 SUPER, with the effective data rates reflecting the different memory technologies.

FP16 throughput reveals a key architectural distinction. The A380E achieves 8.192 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, indicating shader-based rate conversion. The RTX 4080 SUPER delivers 52.22 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, matching its FP32 output. This suggests the NVIDIA card does not rely on a separate FP16 path, while Intel's approach halves FP16 throughput.

Physical and power characteristics differ substantially. The A380E is a single-slot card with no power connectors and a 75 W TDP, plus a 250 W suggested PSU. The RTX 4080 SUPER is a triple-slot card requiring a 1x 16-pin connector, rated at 320 W TDP with a 700 W suggested PSU. Dimensions follow: the A380E measures 254 mm by 127 mm by 20 mm, while the RTX 4080 SUPER is 310 mm by 140 mm by 61 mm. The A380E connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RTX 4080 SUPER uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4080 SUPER wins outright in every measurable performance category recorded in the database. Its 86th percentile ranking across all GPUs, combined with an average benchmark score of 54209, places it firmly in the high-performance tier. The A380E, with no benchmark scores and a 50th percentile placement, cannot compete in raw speed.

The A380E's advantages lie in system integration rather than performance. Its 75 W TDP requires no external power connectors, allowing installation in systems with a 250 W recommended PSU. The single-slot form factor and compact dimensions of 254 mm by 127 mm by 20 mm enable use in space-constrained chassis. Its display output of 4x DisplayPort 2.0 supports modern monitors, and the PCIe 4.0 x8 interface reduces lane requirements compared to the RTX 4080 SUPER's x16 connection.

For workload distribution, the RTX 4080 SUPER suits compute-heavy tasks. Its 52.22 TFLOPS FP32 and matching FP16 throughput, along with 320 tensor cores, equip it for AI and general compute. The 16 GB GDDR6X memory with 736.3 GB/s bandwidth supports large datasets. The A380E, with 4.096 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.192 TFLOPS FP16, targets basic graphics output and light compute at low power.

The RTX 4080 SUPER's benchmark results show balanced strength across APIs. Its Passmark DX9 score of 381 exceeds its DX11 score of 301, which exceeds DX10 at 193 and DX12 at 134. The Geekbench Vulkan score of 260075 is higher than OpenCL's 219065, suggesting particular Vulkan efficiency. The A380E has no comparable data, so its API-specific behavior remains unmeasured.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 54209, while the A380E has no recorded benchmark scores and an average of 0.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER delivers 736.3 GB/s from 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus. The A380E provides 186.0 GB/s from 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The A380E has a 75 W TDP with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU. The RTX 4080 SUPER has a 320 W TDP, requires a 1x 16-pin connector, and needs a 700 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has 10240 shading units, ten times the A380E's 1024.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

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

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has a density of 121.1M transistors per mm² on a 379 mm² die. The A380E has 45.9M per mm² on a 157 mm² die.

The Verdict

The data clearly assigns these GPUs to different roles. The RTX 4080 SUPER is a high-performance card with recorded benchmark results across modern and legacy APIs, an 86th percentile ranking, and an average score of 54209. Its nearest rivals sit within -0.1 to -2.8 percent, confirming it operates at a competitive level among top-tier GPUs. The A380E has no benchmark data, a 50th percentile placeholder, and a zero average score, making it impossible to position against the RTX 4080 SUPER in performance terms.

The RTX 4080 SUPER is the choice for workloads requiring maximum compute throughput, large memory capacity, and extensive feature support including tensor cores. The A380E serves systems where power draw, physical size, and connector requirements take priority over speed. Its 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it suitable for low-power configurations, while its 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs provide modern display connectivity. The RTX 4080 SUPER's launch MSRP was 999 USD, though the database records no price for the A380E.

Neither card is currently in production, as both are marked end-of-life. The RTX 4080 SUPER was released in January 2024, while the A380E followed in March 2024. For users seeking the recorded performance data, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the only one with measurable results. For those prioritizing minimal power and footprint, the A380E offers a path, but its actual performance remains unquantified in the database.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc A380E | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER |

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

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Ada Lovelace |

| Generation | Alchemist (Arc 3) | GeForce 40 |

| Process node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 45,900 million |

| Die size | 157 mm² | 379 mm² |

| Transistor density | 45.9M / mm² | 121.1M / mm² |

| Base clock | 2000 MHz | 2295 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2000 MHz | 2550 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1937 MHz 15.5 Gbps effective | 1438 MHz 23 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 6 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6X |

| Memory bus width | 96 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 186.0 GB/s | 736.3 GB/s |

| Shading units | 1024 | 10240 |

| TMUs | 64 | 320 |

| ROPs | 32 | 112 |

| RT cores | 8 | 80 |

| Tensor cores | None | 320 |

| Pixel rate | 64.00 GPixel/s | 285.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 128.0 GTexel/s | 816.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 performance | 4.096 TFLOPS | 52.22 TFLOPS |

| FP16 performance | 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) | 52.22 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 320 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | Triple-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 700 W |

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

| Display outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.0 | 1x HDMI 2.13x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Length | 254 mm 10 inches | 310 mm 12.2 inches |

| Height | 127 mm 5 inches | 140 mm 5.5 inches |

| Width | 20 mm 0.8 inches | 61 mm 2.4 inches |

| Release date | 2024-03-31 | 2024-01-30 |

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

| Predecessor | Xe Graphics | GeForce 30 |

| Successor | Battlemage | GeForce 50 |