Intel Arc A380E x2 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Max-Q Comparison

Intel Arc A380E x2 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Max-Q occupy different segments of the mobile and embedded GPU market, and the recorded data shows a clear performance hierarchy. The RTX 4050 Max-Q delivers roughly twice the FP32 compute of the Arc A380E x2, while the Arc A380E x2 counters with a higher base clock, a lower power envelope requirement, and a unique multi-output display configuration. The data indicates that the RTX 4050 Max-Q is the stronger compute and rendering solution, while the Arc A380E x2 serves specialized multi-display or embedded applications.

The Verdict

The RTX 4050 Max-Q is the faster GPU in raw compute and graphics throughput. Its FP32 performance of 8.218 TFLOPS is exactly double the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Arc A380E x2. The RTX 4050 Max-Q also has more shading units (2560 vs 1024), more texture mapping units (80 vs 64), more raster output units (48 vs 32), and more ray tracing cores (20 vs 8). In pixel throughput, the RTX 4050 Max-Q reaches 77.04 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s for the Arc A380E x2, a 20% advantage. Texture rate is nearly identical: 128.4 GTexel/s for the NVIDIA part versus 128.0 GTexel/s for the Intel part.

The Arc A380E x2 does hold advantages in clock speed and power. Its base and boost clocks are both 2000 MHz, while the RTX 4050 Max-Q runs at 1140 MHz base and 1605 MHz boost. The Arc A380E x2 has a TDP of 130 W with a suggested power supply of 300 W, whereas the RTX 4050 Max-Q has a TDP of 35 W and requires no dedicated power connector. The RTX 4050 Max-Q is an integrated GPU package (IGP) designed for portable devices, while the Arc A380E x2 is a single-slot card with 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs.

For users choosing between these two, the decision hinges on application. The RTX 4050 Max-Q is the pick for general 3D rendering, ray tracing, and FP32-heavy workloads due to its 2x compute advantage. The Arc A380E x2 is the pick for multi-display setups or embedded systems requiring 8 independent display outputs, as the RTX 4050 Max-Q's display outputs are portable device dependent. Neither part has a launch MSRP in the database, so price plays no role in this analysis.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4050 Max-Q in FP32 compute?

A: The RTX 4050 Max-Q delivers 8.218 TFLOPS FP32, which is exactly double the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Arc A380E x2.

Q: Which GPU has a higher clock speed?

A: The Arc A380E x2 has a base and boost clock of 2000 MHz, while the RTX 4050 Max-Q has a base clock of 1140 MHz and a boost clock of 1605 MHz.

Q: What are the memory specifications of both GPUs?

A: Both GPUs have 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus. The Arc A380E x2 has memory clocked at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective speed, yielding 186.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4050 Max-Q has memory clocked at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed, yielding 192.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The RTX 4050 Max-Q has 20 ray tracing cores, while the Arc A380E x2 has 8 ray tracing cores.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The Arc A380E x2 has a TDP of 130 W and requires a 1x 6-pin power connector with a suggested power supply of 300 W. The RTX 4050 Max-Q has a TDP of 35 W and requires no power connector.

Q: Which GPU supports more display outputs?

A: The Arc A380E x2 supports 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The RTX 4050 Max-Q's display outputs are portable device dependent, so no fixed count is specified in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architecture generations and design philosophies. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, and belongs to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 7,200 million transistors on a die size of 157 mm², giving a transistor density of 45.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The Arc A380E x2 has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 raster output units, and 8 ray tracing cores. It does not list tensor cores in the database. Its FP16 performance is 8.192 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32. The architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Max-Q uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD107 chip, part of the GeForce 40 Mobile generation. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 18,900 million transistors on a die size of 159 mm², giving a transistor density of 118.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The RTX 4050 Max-Q has 2560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, 48 raster output units, 20 ray tracing cores, and 80 tensor cores. Its FP16 performance is 8.218 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, meaning FP16 throughput equals FP32 throughput. This is a notable architectural difference: the Intel part halves FP16 rate versus FP32, while the NVIDIA part maintains full rate. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The transistor density difference is stark. The RTX 4050 Max-Q packs 118.9 million transistors per mm² versus 45.9 million for the Arc A380E x2, reflecting the denser 5 nm process. The NVIDIA chip has more than double the transistors (18,900 million vs 7,200 million) on a nearly identical die size (159 mm² vs 157 mm²). The RTX 4050 Max-Q also includes tensor cores, which the Arc A380E x2 lacks, enabling AI-accelerated workloads on the NVIDIA part.

Specification Differences

The database records several direct specification differences between the two GPUs.

• Process node: Arc A380E x2 uses 6 nm, RTX 4050 Max-Q uses 5 nm (both TSMC).
• Transistors: Arc A380E x2 has 7,200 million, RTX 4050 Max-Q has 18,900 million.
• Die size: Arc A380E x2 is 157 mm², RTX 4050 Max-Q is 159 mm².
• Transistor density: Arc A380E x2 is 45.9 million per mm², RTX 4050 Max-Q is 118.9 million per mm².
• Base clock: Arc A380E x2 is 2000 MHz, RTX 4050 Max-Q is 1140 MHz.
• Boost clock: Arc A380E x2 is 2000 MHz, RTX 4050 Max-Q is 1605 MHz.
• Memory clock: Arc A380E x2 is 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective), RTX 4050 Max-Q is 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective).
• Memory bandwidth: Arc A380E x2 is 186.0 GB/s, RTX 4050 Max-Q is 192.0 GB/s.
• Shading units: Arc A380E x2 has 1024, RTX 4050 Max-Q has 2560.
• Texture mapping units: Arc A380E x2 has 64, RTX 4050 Max-Q has 80.
• Raster output units: Arc A380E x2 has 32, RTX 4050 Max-Q has 48.
• Ray tracing cores: Arc A380E x2 has 8, RTX 4050 Max-Q has 20.
• Tensor cores: Arc A380E x2 has none, RTX 4050 Max-Q has 80.
• Pixel rate: Arc A380E x2 is 64.00 GPixel/s, RTX 4050 Max-Q is 77.04 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: Arc A380E x2 is 128.0 GTexel/s, RTX 4050 Max-Q is 128.4 GTexel/s.
• FP32: Arc A380E x2 is 4.096 TFLOPS, RTX 4050 Max-Q is 8.218 TFLOPS.
• FP16: Arc A380E x2 is 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1), RTX 4050 Max-Q is 8.218 TFLOPS (1:1).
• TDP: Arc A380E x2 is 130 W, RTX 4050 Max-Q is 35 W.
• Slot width: Arc A380E x2 is single-slot, RTX 4050 Max-Q is IGP.
• Power connectors: Arc A380E x2 has 1x 6-pin, RTX 4050 Max-Q has none.
• Suggested PSU: Arc A380E x2 is 300 W, RTX 4050 Max-Q has no suggested PSU.
• Display outputs: Arc A380E x2 has 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0, RTX 4050 Max-Q is portable device dependent.
• Dimensions: Arc A380E x2 is 265 mm length, 127 mm height, 20 mm width. RTX 4050 Max-Q has no recorded dimensions.
• Production status: Arc A380E x2 is end-of-life, RTX 4050 Max-Q is active.
• Release date: Arc A380E x2 was released on 2024-03-31, RTX 4050 Max-Q on 2023-01-02.
• Predecessor: Arc A380E x2 predecessor is Xe Graphics, RTX 4050 Max-Q predecessor is GeForce 30 Mobile.
• Successor: Arc A380E x2 successor is Battlemage, RTX 4050 Max-Q successor is GeForce 50 Mobile.

The two share memory size (6 GB GDDR6), bus width (96 bit), bus interface (PCIe 4.0 x8), and API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for these two GPUs, and both have empty benchmark arrays and zero wins in the head-to-head comparison. The nearest rivals lists are also empty for both parts. However, the specification data provides a basis for comparative analysis.

The most significant performance gap is in FP32 compute. The RTX 4050 Max-Q delivers 8.218 TFLOPS, exactly double the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Arc A380E x2. This means for any FP32-heavy workload, such as general 3D rendering or physics simulation, the RTX 4050 Max-Q processes twice as many operations per second.

The pixel rate favors the RTX 4050 Max-Q at 77.04 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s, a 20.4% advantage. This indicates faster rasterization of filled primitives. The texture rate is nearly equal: 128.4 GTexel/s for the RTX 4050 Max-Q versus 128.0 GTexel/s for the Arc A380E x2, a difference of only 0.3%. Both GPUs have similar TMU counts relative to their shader arrays, but the NVIDIA part has 80 TMUs versus 64 for Intel.

Ray tracing capability is heavily skewed toward the RTX 4050 Max-Q, which has 20 RT cores versus 8 for the Arc A380E x2. The NVIDIA part also has 80 tensor cores, which the Intel part lacks entirely. This gives the RTX 4050 Max-Q a substantial lead in ray-traced scenes and any tensor-accelerated workloads like DLSS-style upscaling (though the database does not name specific features).

Memory bandwidth slightly favors the RTX 4050 Max-Q at 192.0 GB/s versus 186.0 GB/s, a 3.2% difference. Both use 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, but the NVIDIA part runs its memory at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) for the Intel part.

The Arc A380E x2 wins on clock speed. Its 2000 MHz base and boost clocks are substantially higher than the RTX 4050 Max-Q's 1140 MHz base and 1605 MHz boost. The Intel part also has a higher FP16 throughput in raw terms when considering the 2:1 ratio: 8.192 TFLOPS versus 8.218 TFLOPS, which is nearly identical. The Arc A380E x2 also has a lower transistor density but a simpler design, with no tensor cores.

In terms of power efficiency, the RTX 4050 Max-Q is far ahead. It delivers 8.218 TFLOPS at 35 W, while the Arc A380E x2 delivers 4.096 TFLOPS at 130 W. The RTX 4050 Max-Q achieves 234.8 GFLOPS per watt, while the Arc A380E x2 achieves 31.5 GFLOPS per watt, a 7.5x efficiency gap. This makes the RTX 4050 Max-Q dramatically more power-efficient for compute tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4050 Max-Q wins in compute performance. Its FP32 throughput of 8.218 TFLOPS is double the Arc A380E x2's 4.096 TFLOPS, making it the clear choice for FP32-heavy workloads. It also wins in pixel rate (77.04 GPixel/s vs 64.00 GPixel/s), ray tracing cores (20 vs 8), and tensor cores (80 vs none). The RTX 4050 Max-Q has more shading units (2560 vs 1024), more TMUs (80 vs 64), and more ROPs (48 vs 32). Its memory bandwidth is higher at 192.0 GB/s versus 186.0 GB/s. The RTX 4050 Max-Q also has a much lower TDP of 35 W versus 130 W, and requires no dedicated power connector, making it suited for portable devices where power draw is constrained. It is the newer active product, released in 2023, versus the end-of-life Arc A380E x2 released in 2024.

The Arc A380E x2 wins in clock speed and display connectivity. Its 2000 MHz base and boost clocks are higher than the RTX 4050 Max-Q's 1140 MHz base and 1605 MHz boost. The Arc A380E x2 provides 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, enabling multi-display configurations that the RTX 4050 Max-Q cannot match, as its display outputs are portable device dependent. The Arc A380E x2 also has a slightly higher texture rate in raw terms (128.0 GTexel/s) versus the RTX 4050 Max-Q (128.4 GTexel/s), though the difference is negligible. The Intel part is a single-slot card with defined dimensions (265 mm length, 127 mm height, 20 mm width), suitable for fixed installations, while the RTX 4050 Max-Q is an integrated GPU package with no recorded dimensions.

The production status also differentiates them: the Arc A380E x2 is end-of-life with a successor named Battlemage, while the RTX 4050 Max-Q is active with a successor named GeForce 50 Mobile. For any new deployment, the RTX 4050 Max-Q offers an active product line with 2x the compute and better power characteristics. For legacy multi-display systems requiring 8 outputs, the Arc A380E x2 remains the only option in this comparison.