Intel Arc A380E x2 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no head-to-head benchmark results for the Intel Arc A380E x2 versus the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q. Neither product has an average benchmark score, and both share the same 50th percentile ranking against all GPUs in the database. This absence of measured performance data means a direct numerical comparison of frame rates or compute workloads is not possible from the available records. What the database does provide is a detailed architectural comparison, and from those specifications, the performance envelopes can be inferred with reasonable confidence.

The RTX 4080 Max-Q clearly dominates in raw compute throughput based on the specification sheet. Its FP32 performance is recorded at 20.04 TFLOPS, while the Arc A380E x2 delivers 4.096 TFLOPS. That is a fivefold difference in single-precision floating-point capability. The texture rate tells a similar story: the NVIDIA part achieves 313.2 GTexel/s, versus 128.0 GTexel/s for the Intel part. Pixel throughput also favors NVIDIA at 108.0 GPixel/s, compared to 64.00 GPixel/s. These are not close margins; they represent different performance classes entirely.

Memory bandwidth is another decisive gap. The RTX 4080 Max-Q uses a 192-bit bus with GDDR6 at 18 Gbps effective, producing 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Arc A380E x2 has a 96-bit bus with GDDR6 at 15.5 Gbps effective, yielding 186.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA solution provides more than twice the memory bandwidth, which directly impacts high-resolution textures, large scene complexity, and compute workloads that stream data. The Intel card's 6 GB frame buffer is half the 12 GB capacity of the NVIDIA part, further limiting its ability to hold large datasets or high-resolution assets.

The Arc A380E x2 does hold advantages in specific areas. Its base and boost clocks are both 2000 MHz, whereas the RTX 4080 Max-Q runs at a base clock of 795 MHz and a boost clock of 1350 MHz. The Intel chip operates at a substantially higher frequency, which helps narrow the gap in latency-sensitive tasks that do not scale perfectly with core count. However, the NVIDIA part compensates with 7424 shading units, 232 texture mapping units, and 80 render output units, compared to 1024, 64, and 32 respectively for the Intel offering. The sheer scale of execution resources overwhelms the clock advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different architectural generations and design philosophies. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the Xe-HPG architecture on the DG2-128 chip, part of the Alchemist generation (Arc 3). It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 7,200 million transistors packed into a 157 mm² die. The transistor density calculates to 45.9 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on the AD104 chip, part of the GeForce 40 Mobile generation. It is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, containing 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, for a density of 121.8 million per square millimeter.

The transistor count difference is stark: the NVIDIA chip contains roughly five times as many transistors as the Intel chip. Die size is larger as well, but the density gap shows the more advanced 5 nm process packs transistors much tighter. This is a fundamental architectural difference, not just a clock or core count variation.

Ray tracing hardware differs significantly. The Arc A380E x2 includes 8 ray tracing cores, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q has 58. The NVIDIA part also integrates 232 tensor cores, which the Intel chip lacks entirely. Tensor cores accelerate AI workloads, including DLSS-style upscaling and inference tasks. The absence of such units on the Intel part means any AI-accelerated feature set is unavailable or must run on general-purpose shaders.

Memory architecture also diverges. The Intel GPU uses a 96-bit memory bus, while NVIDIA uses a 192-bit bus. Both use GDDR6, but the effective data rate differs: 15.5 Gbps on Intel versus 18 Gbps on NVIDIA. The combination of wider bus and faster memory gives the RTX 4080 Max-Q its 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part's 186.0 GB/s is a consequence of both narrower bus and slower memory clock.

Form factor and power delivery present another set of contrasts. The Arc A380E x2 is a single-slot card measuring 265 mm in length, 127 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. It requires a single 6-pin power connector and carries a TDP of 130 W, with a suggested PSU rating of 300 W. The RTX 4080 Max-Q is an integrated GPU (IGP) with no power connectors and a TDP of just 60 W. This makes the NVIDIA part far more power-efficient per unit of compute, though the Intel card is a discrete add-in board. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for Intel versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for NVIDIA.

Display outputs are another distinguishing factor. The Intel card provides 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 connectors, making it suited for multi-display or specialized output configurations. The NVIDIA part's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its mobile IGP nature. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4080 Max-Q wins in every category where raw throughput is the deciding factor. Its FP32 compute of 20.04 TFLOPS versus 4.096 TFLOPS makes it the clear choice for general-purpose compute, physics simulation, and any workload that relies on massive parallel shading. The 20.04 TFLOPS FP16 rating, achieved at a 1:1 ratio, matches its FP32 output, whereas the Intel part reaches 8.192 TFLOPS FP16 through a 2:1 ratio. The NVIDIA GPU does not sacrifice half-precision performance, which matters for AI training and certain scientific workloads.

Texture-heavy rendering favors NVIDIA decisively. With 232 TMUs and a 313.2 GTexel/s texture rate, the RTX 4080 Max-Q handles filtered texture lookups far faster than the Intel card's 64 TMUs and 128.0 GTexel/s. Pixel fill rate also goes to NVIDIA: 108.0 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s, driven by 80 ROPs against 32. This impacts high-resolution rasterization and anti-aliasing performance.

Ray tracing is another clear NVIDIA win. The 58 RT cores against 8 provide a substantial advantage in ray-traced scenes, and the tensor cores add DLSS capability that the Intel part cannot match. Memory capacity and bandwidth favor NVIDIA as well: 12 GB versus 6 GB, and 432.0 GB/s versus 186.0 GB/s. Large assets, high-resolution textures, and multi-tasking with background workloads will all perform better on the NVIDIA part.

The Arc A380E x2 wins in areas tied to its discrete card design and clock speed. Its 2000 MHz base and boost clocks exceed the NVIDIA part's 795 MHz base and 1350 MHz boost. For workloads that are latency-bound or that do not scale with core count, the higher clock rate can provide an edge. The 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs are unique; the NVIDIA part lacks discrete display outputs entirely. For multi-monitor or specialized video wall setups, the Intel card is the only option with defined output hardware.

Power consumption is a nuanced comparison. The RTX 4080 Max-Q uses 60 W TDP, less than half the 130 W of the Intel card, while delivering roughly five times the FP32 throughput. In terms of performance per watt, NVIDIA is far ahead. However, the Intel card's 130 W TDP is modest for a discrete GPU, and its suggested 300 W PSU requirement is not demanding. The NVIDIA part's integrated nature means it cannot be installed as a standalone card; it is fixed to a portable device.

The Verdict

The data presents a lopsided comparison. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q outperforms the Intel Arc A380E x2 in nearly every measurable specification that correlates with GPU performance. Its FP32 throughput is roughly five times higher, its memory bandwidth is more than double, its ray tracing core count is over seven times greater, and it includes tensor cores that the Intel part does not have. The 12 GB frame buffer doubles the Intel card's 6 GB capacity. For any application that demands high compute throughput, large memory footprints, or modern AI-accelerated features, the RTX 4080 Max-Q is the only sensible choice from the recorded data.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 is not without purpose, but its role is narrow. Its 2000 MHz clock speed is the highest in this comparison, and its 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs make it suitable for multi-display configurations. Its 130 W TDP and single 6-pin connector mean it is easy to power. For a workstation that needs many display outputs and does not require extreme compute, the Intel part can serve. But for general gaming, rendering, or compute workloads, the RTX 4080 Max-Q's specification sheet leaves no room for argument.

The production status reinforces the verdict. The Intel Arc A380E x2 is marked as end-of-life, with a release date of March 2024 and a listed successor of Battlemage. The NVIDIA GPU is active, released in January 2023, with a successor of GeForce 50 Mobile. The Intel part is a legacy product, while NVIDIA continues its product line. The database shows no benchmark wins for either side, but the specification gaps are so wide that measured performance would almost certainly confirm the architectural advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q has 7424 shading units, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 has 1024 shading units.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 4080 Max-Q provides 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth via a 192-bit GDDR6 bus at 18 Gbps effective. The Arc A380E x2 provides 186.0 GB/s via a 96-bit GDDR6 bus at 15.5 Gbps effective.

Q: Does the Intel card have tensor cores?

A: No, the Arc A380E x2 has no tensor cores. The RTX 4080 Max-Q includes 232 tensor cores.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The Arc A380E x2 has a TDP of 130 W, uses a single 6-pin power connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has a TDP of 60 W and requires no power connectors.

Q: Which GPU supports more display outputs?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 has 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The NVIDIA RTX 4080 Max-Q has display outputs listed as "Portable Device Dependent."

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 is end-of-life. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q is active.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Arc A380E x2 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q |

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

| Chip | DG2-128 | AD104 |

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Ada Lovelace |

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

| 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 | 795 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2000 MHz | 1350 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 96 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 186.0 GB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 7424 |

| TMUs | 64 | 232 |

| ROPs | 32 | 80 |

| RT Cores | 8 | 58 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 232 |

| Pixel Rate | 64.00 GPixel/s | 108.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 128.0 GTexel/s | 313.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.096 TFLOPS | 20.04 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) | 20.04 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 130 W | 60 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | None |

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

| Display Outputs | 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions | 265 mm x 127 mm x 20 mm | None recorded |

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

| Release Date | 2024-03-31 | 2023-01-02 |

| Predecessor | Xe Graphics | GeForce 30 Mobile |

| Successor | Battlemage | GeForce 50 Mobile |