Intel Arc A380E vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation Comparison

Intel Arc A380E and NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation occupy very different tiers in the database, and the recorded measurements confirm a wide performance gap. The Intel part sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, while the NVIDIA part reaches the 95th percentile. The Arc A380E has an average benchmark score of 0 in the database, meaning no recorded benchmark results exist for it, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada shows a strong average score of 117,088 across its two recorded tests. This asymmetry defines the comparison: the NVIDIA part is measured and proven, the Intel part is specified but unverified in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is heavily one-sided based on recorded data. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins every measurable category. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 124,812, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 109,364. These are the only benchmark results in the database for either product, so the Intel Arc A380E has no wins to claim. The Arc A380E does not appear in any benchmark test, and its percentile ranking of 50 against all GPUs is a placement, not a measured victory.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada also leads in raw compute specifications that predict performance. It delivers 19.17 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the Arc A380E delivers 4.096 TFLOPS. That is a 4.7x advantage for the NVIDIA part in single-precision compute. In FP16, the NVIDIA part again delivers 19.17 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part reaches 8.192 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada also has 6,144 shading units versus 1,024 on the Arc A380E, and 192 TMUs versus 64, plus 64 ROPs versus 32. Pixel rate favors NVIDIA at 99.84 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s, and texture rate favors NVIDIA at 299.5 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. It carries 20 GB of GDDR6 across a 160-bit bus, yielding 280.0 GB/s, while the Arc A380E has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, yielding 186.0 GB/s. For workloads that depend on large datasets or high memory throughput, the NVIDIA part has a 3.3x capacity advantage and a 1.5x bandwidth advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs use entirely different architectures and process nodes. The Intel Arc A380E uses the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-128 chip, built on TSMC's 6 nm process at a foundry. It integrates 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD104 chip, built on TSMC's 5 nm process. It packs 35,800 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 121.8M per mm². The NVIDIA chip has roughly 5x the transistor count and nearly 2.7x the density, which explains its much higher compute throughput despite a similar power envelope.

Clock behavior differs sharply. The Intel part runs at a constant 2000 MHz base and boost, with no boost variation. The NVIDIA part has a 720 MHz base clock and a 1560 MHz boost clock, a 2.2x boost ratio. The NVIDIA part compensates for its lower base clock with a much larger shader array, and its boost clock still trails the Intel clock by 22%, yet its per-clock execution width dominates.

Memory architecture also differs. The Intel part uses GDDR6 at 1937 MHz or 15.5 Gbps effective, with a 96-bit bus. The NVIDIA part uses GDDR6 at 1750 MHz or 14 Gbps effective, with a 160-bit bus. The NVIDIA bus width is 67% wider, which is why its bandwidth is higher despite a lower memory clock.

Feature sets diverge on ray tracing and tensor hardware. The Intel part has 8 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has 48 ray tracing cores and 192 tensor cores. The tensor cores enable AI-accelerated workloads that the Intel part cannot handle through dedicated hardware, and the 6x ray tracing core count suggests a substantial advantage in ray-traced rendering tasks. The Intel part uses the Alchemist generation under the Arc 3 branding, while the NVIDIA part is part of the GeForce 40-series, specifically the Workstation Ada generation.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher benchmark scores in the database?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has recorded scores of 124,812 in Geekbench OpenCL and 109,364 in Geekbench Vulkan. The Intel Arc A380E has no recorded benchmark scores, so the NVIDIA part wins every measured test.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the Intel Arc A380E has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory. The NVIDIA part provides more than 3x the capacity.

Q: How do the FP32 compute figures compare?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation delivers 19.17 TFLOPS of FP32, while the Intel Arc A380E delivers 4.096 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA part is roughly 4.7x faster in single-precision compute.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same API levels?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The API feature set is identical in the recorded data.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has 6,144 shading units, while the Intel Arc A380E has 1,024 shading units. The NVIDIA part has 6x the shader count.

Q: What are the physical size differences?

A: The Intel Arc A380E measures 254 mm in length, 127 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, and is a single-slot card. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation measures 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height, and is a dual-slot card. The NVIDIA part is much shorter and lower profile, while the Intel part is longer and taller.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc A380E | NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation |

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

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 35,800 million |

| Die Size | 157 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 45.9M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2000 MHz | 720 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2000 MHz | 1560 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 20 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 96 bit | 160 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 186.0 GB/s | 280.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 64 | 192 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 8 | 48 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 192 |

| Pixel Rate | 64.00 GPixel/s | 99.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 128.0 GTexel/s | 299.5 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Compute | 4.096 TFLOPS | 19.17 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Compute | 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) | 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 70 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.0 | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Dimensions (L x H) | 254 mm x 127 mm | 168 mm x 69 mm |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2024-03-31 | 2023-03-20 |

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation also has a wider PCIe interface, using PCIe 4.0 x16 versus the Intel card's PCIe 4.0 x8. Both cards draw power without external connectors, and both list a suggested PSU of 250 W. The NVIDIA card has a lower TDP of 70 W compared to 75 W for the Intel card, meaning the much higher compute throughput comes at a slightly lower power draw in the recorded specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these two GPUs. Instead, the recorded data shows the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation with two benchmark scores and the Intel Arc A380E with none. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 124,812 places the NVIDIA part at the 95th percentile among all GPUs, while the Intel part sits at the 50th percentile. The Geekbench Vulkan score of 109,364 reinforces the same picture. The nearest rivals to the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation in the database include the NVIDIA GB10 at 117,393 average score, which is 0.3% lower, the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 at 118,976, which is 1.6% higher, the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB at 114,395, which is 2.4% lower, and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile at 113,944, which is 2.8% lower. These deltas show the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation sits in a tight competitive band near the top of the database, while the Intel Arc A380E has no comparable scores to place it in such a ranking.

The compute specification gap mirrors the benchmark gap. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation achieves 19.17 TFLOPS FP32, which is 4.7x the Intel part's 4.096 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 299.5 GTexel/s is 2.3x the Intel part's 128.0 GTexel/s. Its pixel rate of 99.84 GPixel/s is 1.6x the Intel part's 64.00 GPixel/s. Memory bandwidth of 280.0 GB/s is 1.5x the Intel part's 186.0 GB/s. Every measurable quantity in the database favors the NVIDIA card by a wide margin.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a clear hierarchy. The Intel Arc A380E is an end-of-life product with no benchmark scores in the database, a 50th percentile global ranking, and specifications that place it in the entry-level segment. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is an active product with strong benchmark results, a 95th percentile global ranking, and specifications that place it among the top workstation-class GPUs. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins on every measured metric: compute throughput, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, shading units, ray tracing cores, tensor cores, pixel rate, and texture rate. It also achieves these results with a slightly lower TDP of 70 W versus 75 W, and in a shorter physical package of 168 mm versus 254 mm, though it is dual-slot rather than single-slot.

For workloads that rely on FP32 compute, large memory footprints, or AI acceleration through tensor cores, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the only viable choice based on the data. The Intel Arc A380E offers no recorded performance evidence, and its specifications suggest it cannot match the NVIDIA part in any compute-heavy task. The Intel part's advantages are limited to a higher memory clock of 1937 MHz versus 1750 MHz, a higher base clock of 2000 MHz versus 720 MHz, and a longer card length. None of these translate into a performance win in the recorded database. The production status also matters: the Intel part is end-of-life with a successor named Battlemage, while the NVIDIA part remains active with a successor named Blackwell PRO W. The data directs users toward the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation for any application where measured performance is the deciding factor.