Intel Arc A380E x2 vs Intel Arc Pro B50 Comparison

Intel Arc A380E x2 and Intel Arc Pro B50 represent two very different interpretations of Intel’s GPU architecture. The A380E x2 is a dual-GPU configuration built on the older Alchemist design, while the Pro B50 is a single, newer Battlemage-based card aimed at professional workloads. The recorded data shows a clear split in capabilities, with each card dominating in specific areas. This analysis relies solely on the database measurements to outline where each product stands.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc A380E x2 and the Intel Arc Pro B50. The wins counter shows zero victories for either side, and the head-to-head benchmark list is empty. However, the Intel Arc Pro B50 has a full set of recorded benchmark scores, while the A380E x2 has none in the database. This absence of data for the A380E x2 is itself a significant finding: the dual-GPU configuration lacks any measured performance entries, making direct numerical comparison impossible.

For the Intel Arc Pro B50, the benchmark results show a mixed profile. The PassMark G3D score of 12553 indicates solid overall graphics performance, while the PassMark G2D score of 717 reflects modest 2D capabilities. The compute-oriented PassMark GPU Compute score of 6037 suggests moderate parallel processing power. In DirectX workloads, the Pro B50 scores 144 in DirectX 9, 100 in DirectX 11, and 64 in DirectX 12, with a notably lower DirectX 10 score of 58. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test yields a score of 1604.

The Pro B50’s nearest rivals in the database provide context for its standing. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 scores an average of 2662, which is 0.1% higher than the Pro B50’s average of 2660. The NVIDIA Quadro K1100M averages 2664, a 0.2% lead. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 trails slightly with 2645, putting the Pro B50 0.6% ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER averages 2690, giving it a 1.1% edge over the Pro B50. These deltas show the Pro B50 sitting in a narrow performance band, within roughly one percentage point of all four rivals. The percentile ranking of 17.0 places it below most GPUs in the database, while the A380E x2 holds a percentile of 50.0 despite having no benchmark scores recorded.

Architecture Differences

The two cards use fundamentally different silicon. The Intel Arc A380E x2 employs the DG2-128 chip based on the Xe-HPG architecture, belonging to the Alchemist generation (Arc 3). The Intel Arc Pro B50 uses the BMG-G21 chip with the Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage (Pro Series) generation. This generational leap brings substantial changes to the underlying design.

Manufacturing processes differ significantly. The A380E x2 is built on a 6 nm node at TSMC, while the Pro B50 uses a 5 nm node, also at TSMC. The transistor counts reflect the scale difference: the A380E x2 packs 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9 million per square millimeter. The Pro B50 contains 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die, with a density of 72.1 million per square millimeter. The Pro B50’s die is 73% larger in area and holds nearly three times as many transistors.

Clock behavior diverges sharply. The A380E x2 runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost clocks, with memory at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective). The Pro B50 has a 1700 MHz base clock but boosts to 2600 MHz, while its memory operates at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). Despite the lower base clock, the Pro B50’s boost clock exceeds the A380E x2’s sustained clock by 600 MHz.

Memory configurations also differ. The A380E x2 offers 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, delivering 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro B50 provides 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro B50 has 10 GB more memory and 38 GB/s more bandwidth, a 20% increase in throughput.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Arc A380E x2 have any recorded benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The database lists zero benchmarks for the Intel Arc A380E x2, and its average benchmark score is 0. The Intel Arc Pro B50, by contrast, has eight recorded benchmark entries spanning 3DMark and PassMark tests.

Q: How does the Intel Arc Pro B50 compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Pro B50’s average benchmark score of 2660 sits within 1.1% of all four nearest rivals. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER leads by 1.1%, the NVIDIA Quadro K1100M leads by 0.2%, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 leads by 0.1%, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 trails by 0.6%.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B50 boosts to 2600 MHz, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 has a boost clock of 2000 MHz. The Pro B50’s boost clock is 600 MHz higher.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two cards?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the Intel Arc Pro B50 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory. The Pro B50 offers 10 GB more memory capacity.

Q: Which card uses a smaller manufacturing process node?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B50 uses a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 uses a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. The 5 nm node is the smaller of the two.

Q: Are both cards based on the same graphics architecture?

A: No. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the Xe-HPG architecture from the Alchemist generation, while the Intel Arc Pro B50 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture from the Battlemage generation.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every key specification field. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the DG2-128 chip with Xe-HPG architecture from the Alchemist generation, while the Intel Arc Pro B50 uses the BMG-G21 chip with Xe2-HPG architecture from the Battlemage generation. The process node shifts from 6 nm to 5 nm, transistor count rises from 7,200 million to 19,600 million, and die size grows from 157 mm² to 272 mm².

Clock speeds show a notable divergence. The A380E x2 has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz, while the Pro B50 has a base clock of 1700 MHz and a boost clock of 2600 MHz. Memory clocks differ as well: 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) for the A380E x2 versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for the Pro B50.

Memory capacity and bandwidth favor the Pro B50. The A380E x2 has 6 GB on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Pro B50 has 16 GB on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro B50 also doubles the shading units (2048 versus 1024), TMUs (128 versus 64), and RT cores (16 versus 8). The ROP count, however, favors the A380E x2 at 32 versus the Pro B50’s 16.

Compute throughput shows a large gap. The A380E x2 delivers 4.096 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.192 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), while the Pro B50 delivers 10.65 TFLOPS FP32 and 21.30 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The pixel rate favors the A380E x2 at 64.00 GPixel/s versus 41.60 GPixel/s, but the texture rate favors the Pro B50 at 332.8 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s.

Power and physical specifications also differ. The A380E x2 has a TDP of 130 W, requires a 1x 6-pin power connector, and is a single-slot card. The Pro B50 has a TDP of 70 W, needs no power connectors, and is a dual-slot card. The A380E x2 is longer at 265 mm (10.4 inches) with a height of 127 mm (5 inches) and width of 20 mm (0.8 inches). The Pro B50 is shorter at 167 mm (6.6 inches) with a height of 69 mm (2.7 inches) and width of 40 mm (1.6 inches). The A380E x2 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Pro B50 uses PCIe 5.0 x8. Display outputs differ: 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 for the A380E x2 versus 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 for the Pro B50. The A380E x2 is end-of-life with a release date of 2024-03-31, while the Pro B50 is active with a release date of 2025-09-04. The Pro B50 has a launch MSRP of 349 USD.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380E x2 wins on raw pixel throughput. Its pixel rate of 64.00 GPixel/s exceeds the Pro B50’s 41.60 GPixel/s by 53.8%. The A380E x2 also has double the ROP count (32 versus 16), which supports higher fill-rate workloads. Its single-slot design and longer 265 mm profile suggest installation in systems with more physical space. The 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs provide more display connectivity options than the Pro B50’s 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 ports.

The Intel Arc Pro B50 wins on compute and memory. Its FP32 performance of 10.65 TFLOPS is 2.6 times the A380E x2’s 4.096 TFLOPS, and its FP16 performance of 21.30 TFLOPS is 2.6 times the A380E x2’s 8.192 TFLOPS. The Pro B50’s 16 GB memory capacity is 2.7 times larger, and its 224.0 GB/s bandwidth is 20.4% higher. The texture rate of 332.8 GTexel/s is 2.6 times the A380E x2’s 128.0 GTexel/s. The Pro B50 also has double the shading units (2048 versus 1024) and double the RT cores (16 versus 8). Its 70 W TDP is 46% lower than the A380E x2’s 130 W, and it requires no external power connector. The Pro B50’s PCIe 5.0 x8 interface provides double the bandwidth of the A380E x2’s PCIe 4.0 x8.

The Verdict

The database presents a clear choice based on workload priorities. The Intel Arc A380E x2, with its higher pixel rate, more ROPs, and greater display output count, suits scenarios where fill-rate and multi-display output are primary concerns. Its single-slot form factor and 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs make it a candidate for dense multi-screen setups. The lack of recorded benchmark scores, however, means its actual application performance cannot be verified from the database.

The Intel Arc Pro B50 is the more capable card for compute-heavy and memory-intensive tasks. The 2.6x advantage in FP32 and FP16 throughput, combined with 16 GB of memory and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth, indicates a card designed for professional workloads that demand large data sets and parallel processing. The 70 W TDP with no power connector requirement makes it easier to integrate into power-constrained systems. The recorded benchmarks show it performing within 1.1% of its nearest rivals, which include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030, Quadro K1100M, GT 440, and RTX 5070 SUPER. Its percentile ranking of 17.0 places it in the lower tier of all GPUs in the database.

The A380E x2’s percentile of 50.0 suggests it sits at the median of all GPUs, but this ranking is not backed by any measured benchmark data. The Pro B50’s 17.0 percentile is derived from its actual scores. For users who need verified performance numbers, the Pro B50 is the only card with recorded data. For those prioritizing pixel fill rate and maximum display outputs, the A380E x2 offers specific hardware advantages, though its end-of-life status and lack of benchmark entries limit confidence in its real-world performance. The Pro B50, with active production status and a 349 USD launch MSRP, represents the newer generation with substantially higher compute resources and memory capacity.