Intel Arc A380E x2 vs Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database contains no recorded head-to-head measurements for these two parts. The wins tally sits at 0 for each, and no synthetic or real-world test scores are available to compare directly. What the data does offer is a complete set of specifications that allow for a calculated comparison of theoretical performance ceilings.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 delivers 4.096 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile delivers 2.355 TFLOPS. That places the desktop card at roughly 74% higher raw shader throughput. In FP16 workloads, the A380E x2 reaches 8.192 TFLOPS versus 4.710 TFLOPS for the mobile part, again a significant margin in favor of the discrete card. These figures come directly from the shading unit counts: 1024 for the A380E x2 versus 512 for the mobile GPU, with identical per-unit throughput assumptions.

Texture fill rates tell a similar story. The A380E x2 achieves 128.0 GTexel/s, while the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile manages 73.60 GTexel/s. That is a 74% advantage for the desktop card, matching the FP32 ratio exactly since both parts have the same TMU-to-shader ratio (64 TMUs versus 32 TMUs). Pixel throughput shows a narrower gap: 64.00 GPixel/s for the A380E x2 versus 36.80 GPixel/s for the mobile part, a 74% lead as well, driven by 32 ROPs against 16 ROPs.

Memory bandwidth is where the gap becomes extreme. The A380E x2 uses 6 GB of dedicated GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, producing 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." In practice, that means the mobile GPU's memory performance is tied to the host platform's RAM configuration, which will almost always fall well short of dedicated GDDR6 bandwidth. The desktop card also runs its memory at 1937 MHz, 15.5 Gbps effective, whereas the mobile part has no independent memory clock.

Clock behavior differs substantially. The A380E x2 runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost, with no game clock listed. The mobile part has a 300 MHz base clock and a 2300 MHz boost clock. That 2300 MHz boost is higher than the A380E x2's sustained 2000 MHz, which partially compensates for the mobile part's smaller core configuration. Even so, the 512-shader count cannot match the 1024-shader count when both are running at their respective boost frequencies.

The pixel rate comparison confirms the memory and ROP limitations of the mobile part. At 36.80 GPixel/s, the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile delivers fill rates that are competitive with older integrated graphics, while the A380E x2 at 64.00 GPixel/s sits firmly in entry-level discrete territory. Neither part has recorded benchmark scores in the database, so the average benchmark score for both is 0, and both sit at the 50th percentile of all GPUs by default.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380E x2 wins in every measurable compute category except one: boost clock. The desktop card has 2x the shading units, 2x the TMUs, 2x the ROPs, and 2x the ray tracing cores (8 versus 4). Its FP32 throughput of 4.096 TFLOPS is 74% higher than the mobile part's 2.355 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 128.0 GTexel/s is 74% higher. Its pixel rate of 64.00 GPixel/s is 74% higher. Its memory bandwidth of 186.0 GB/s is effectively unbounded compared to the mobile part's system-shared configuration.

The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile wins on power efficiency and physical footprint. The mobile part draws 25 W, while the A380E x2 draws 130 W. That is an 80% reduction in power draw for the mobile GPU. The mobile GPU is also an IGP with no power connectors, no slot width, and no dimensions listed, meaning it occupies no expansion slot and requires no additional cooling beyond the host laptop's thermal solution. The A380E x2 is a single-slot card measuring 265 mm in length, 127 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, requiring a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU.

The mobile part also has a higher boost clock at 2300 MHz versus 2000 MHz for the desktop card. That 300 MHz advantage does not overcome the shader count deficit, but it does mean the mobile GPU's compute units are individually faster when running at peak boost. The mobile part's FP16 throughput of 4.710 TFLOPS is still less than the A380E x2's 8.192 TFLOPS, so even the clock advantage cannot close the gap.

For ray tracing workloads, the A380E x2 has 8 RT cores versus 4 on the mobile part. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature levels are identical. The desktop card's additional RT cores give it a clear edge in any ray-traced content that scales with core count.

The mobile part wins on portability by definition: it is an integrated GPU in a Panther Lake chip, with display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent." The A380E x2 offers 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, which makes it suited for multi-display workstation or embedded setups. The mobile GPU has no display output specification of its own because it relies on the host device's panel and ports.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Arc A380E x2 is the stronger performer in every raw compute metric recorded. It doubles the shader count, TMUs, ROPs, and RT cores of the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile. It delivers 74% higher FP32 throughput, 74% higher texture fill, and 74% higher pixel fill. Its dedicated 6 GB GDDR6 memory with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent memory performance that the mobile part cannot guarantee due to its system-shared architecture.

The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is not a competitor in absolute performance; it is a different class of product. The 25 W power envelope, IGP form factor, and system-shared memory make it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermal limits matter more than raw frame rates. Its 2.355 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is sufficient for basic gaming and media tasks, but it will struggle in demanding titles at higher resolutions, especially with ray tracing enabled.

Users who need a discrete GPU with dedicated memory, multi-display support, and higher compute throughput should choose the A380E x2. The 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs alone justify it for digital signage, multi-monitor workstations, or embedded systems. The 130 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU requirement are acceptable trade-offs for that level of I/O flexibility.

Users who need graphics in a mobile device with minimal power draw should choose the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile. The 25 W TDP is the defining characteristic, and the system-shared memory model is typical for integrated GPUs. The active production status of the mobile part versus the end-of-life status of the A380E x2 also matters: the mobile GPU is currently available in new products, while the desktop card is discontinued.

Neither part has recorded benchmark scores in the database, so these conclusions rest entirely on specification analysis. The 50th percentile ranking for both is a placeholder, not a measured result. Buyers should treat the theoretical performance differences as directionally accurate but should not expect exact real-world frame rate ratios to match the compute ratios.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 delivers 4.096 TFLOPS, which is 74% higher than the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile's 2.355 TFLOPS.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each GPU provide?

A: The A380E x2 has 186.0 GB/s from 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses system shared memory with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent."

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The A380E x2 has a 130 W TDP and requires a 1x 6-pin power connector with a 300 W suggested PSU. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has a 25 W TDP and no power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The A380E x2 has 8 RT cores, while the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has 4 RT cores. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: What are the clock speeds of each GPU?

A: The A380E x2 runs at 2000 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile runs at 300 MHz base and 2300 MHz boost.

Q: What display outputs does each GPU offer?

A: The A380E x2 has 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent."

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the DG2-128 chip based on Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. The Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses the Panther Lake chip based on Xe3-LPG architecture, part of the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation.

The manufacturing processes differ significantly. The A380E x2 is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The mobile part uses a 3 nm process at Intel, with transistor count and die size listed as unknown. The smaller process node suggests the mobile part can achieve higher clock speeds at lower power, which is consistent with its 2300 MHz boost clock and 25 W TDP.

The A380E x2 has a transistor density of 45.9M / mm², which is a concrete figure. The mobile part's density is not listed, so no comparison can be made there. The architecture difference is more important: Xe-HPG is a discrete GPU architecture designed for dedicated cards, while Xe3-LPG is optimized for integrated graphics in mobile processors.

Ray tracing implementation differs in scale rather than feature set. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes hardware ray tracing, but the A380E x2 has 8 RT cores versus 4 on the mobile part. The shader array is also doubled: 1024 shading units versus 512.

The memory architecture is fundamentally different. The A380E x2 has dedicated GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile uses system shared memory, with bus width and bandwidth dependent on the host platform. This is the most consequential architectural difference for performance consistency.

The A380E x2 is a PCIe 4.0 x8 discrete card. The mobile part uses an IGP bus interface, meaning it communicates over the internal fabric of the Panther Lake processor rather than a PCIe slot. This affects bandwidth scaling and upgradeability.

Production status differs: the A380E x2 is end-of-life, while the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is active. The desktop card has a predecessor (Xe Graphics) and successor (Battlemage), while the mobile part lists neither.

Specification Differences

Shading Units: The A380E x2 has 1024, the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has 512. The desktop card doubles the mobile part's shader count.

TMUs: 64 versus 32. The A380E x2 has twice the texture mapping units.

ROPs: 32 versus 16. The A380E x2 has twice the render output units.

RT Cores: 8 versus 4. The A380E x2 has twice the ray tracing cores.

Base Clock: 2000 MHz versus 300 MHz. The desktop card's base clock is far higher.

Boost Clock: 2000 MHz versus 2300 MHz. The mobile part has a higher boost clock by 300 MHz.

Memory Size: 6 GB GDDR6 versus system shared. The A380E x2 has dedicated memory.

Memory Bus Width: 96 bit versus system shared. The mobile part's bus width depends on the host platform.

Memory Bandwidth: 186.0 GB/s versus system dependent. The desktop card has fixed bandwidth.

Memory Clock: 1937 MHz, 15.5 Gbps effective versus system shared. The mobile part has no independent memory clock.

FP32 Performance: 4.096 TFLOPS versus 2.355 TFLOPS. The A380E x2 leads by 74%.

FP16 Performance: 8.192 TFLOPS versus 4.710 TFLOPS. The A380E x2 leads by 74%.

Pixel Rate: 64.00 GPixel/s versus 36.80 GPixel/s. The A380E x2 leads by 74%.

Texture Rate: 128.0 GTexel/s versus 73.60 GTexel/s. The A380E x2 leads by 74%.

TDP: 130 W versus 25 W. The mobile part draws 80% less power.

Slot Width: Single-slot versus IGP. The A380E x2 requires a slot, the mobile part does not.

Power Connectors: 1x 6-pin versus none. The desktop card needs external power.

Suggested PSU: 300 W versus not listed. The desktop card has a PSU recommendation.

Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus IGP. Different connection methods.

Display Outputs: 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 versus portable device dependent. The desktop card has fixed outputs.

Dimensions: 265 mm x 127 mm x 20 mm versus no dimensions listed. The mobile part has no physical footprint.

Process Node: 6 nm versus 3 nm. The mobile part uses a smaller process.

Foundry: TSMC versus Intel. Different manufacturers.

Transistors: 7,200 million versus unknown. The desktop card has a listed count.

Die Size: 157 mm² versus unknown. The desktop card has a listed size.

Transistor Density: 45.9M / mm² versus not listed. Only the desktop card has this figure.

Production Status: End-of-life versus active. The mobile part is currently produced.

Release Date: 2024-03-31 versus 2026-01-26. The mobile part is newer.

Predecessor: Xe Graphics versus none listed. Only the desktop card has one.

Successor: Battlemage versus none listed. Only the desktop card has one.