Intel Arc A380E x2 vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data presents two graphics processors with fundamentally different design goals, and the use-case split is defined almost entirely by their architectural roles rather than by direct benchmark comparisons. The Intel Arc A380E x2 is a discrete, single-slot add-in board built around the DG2-128 chip, a 6 nm TSMC part from the Alchemist generation. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM is an integrated graphics processor, an IGP based on the GB20B chip with a 5 nm process, built for the Blackwell 2.0 architecture. The benchmark database shows no head-to-head benchmark entries and zero wins for either item, so the analysis must rely on the specification-level data to separate their intended workloads.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 wins in scenarios requiring a dedicated, self-contained graphics solution with multiple display outputs. It provides 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, which indicates a design aimed at multi-monitor setups, digital signage, or professional visualization environments where driving many displays from a single card is the primary task. Its single-slot form factor, 265 mm length, and 1x 6-pin power connector confirm a discrete card that can be installed into a standard PCIe 4.0 x8 slot. The card's 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus delivers 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth, sufficient for framebuffer-heavy workloads such as high-resolution desktop rendering or light content creation.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM wins in scenarios where massive memory capacity and high compute throughput matter more than display flexibility. Its 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus provides 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth, which is substantially higher than the Intel part. The N1X carries 5120 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, 40 ROPs, 40 RT cores, and 160 tensor cores. Its FP32 throughput of 24.02 TFLOPS and FP16 throughput of 24.02 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio) are far above the Intel part's 4.096 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.192 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). This positions the N1X for compute-heavy tasks such as AI inference, data processing, or large-scale rendering where the 128 GB memory pool is the decisive factor.

The Intel part's architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it a functional graphics card for gaming and GPU-accelerated applications. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, which indicates it is not designed as a consumer graphics card but rather as an integrated processor for embedded or server-like workloads where graphics API compatibility is irrelevant. The use-case split is therefore clear: the Intel Arc A380E x2 is for display-centric and graphics-API-centric tasks, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM is for memory-capacity and raw-compute-centric tasks.

Architecture Differences

The two processors belong to entirely different architectural families, and the data shows a stark contrast in design philosophy. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the Alchemist generation, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The chip, DG2-128, contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture from the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation, fabricated on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. Its GB20B chip has an unknown transistor count but a die size of 382 mm², which is more than double the Intel part's die area.

The memory subsystems are radically different. The Intel card uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, with a memory clock of 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective), producing 186.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA IGP uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, with a memory clock of 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective), producing 273.2 GB/s. The NVIDIA part's memory bandwidth advantage is 47% higher, but its capacity advantage is more than 20 times greater. The Intel part's memory clock is higher in raw MHz, but the NVIDIA part compensates with a wider bus and a different memory type.

Compute resources show a massive disparity. The Intel Arc A380E x2 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 RT cores, with no tensor cores listed. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 40 ROPs, 40 RT cores, and 160 tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has 5 times the shading units, 5 times the TMUs, 1.25 times the ROPs, 5 times the RT cores, and a large tensor core array that the Intel part lacks entirely. The pixel rate of the NVIDIA part is 93.84 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s for Intel, and the texture rate is 750.7 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s, a 5.9 times difference.

Clock behavior also differs. The Intel card runs at a fixed 2000 MHz for both base and boost, with no game clock listed. The NVIDIA IGP has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz, a 3.2 times boost range. The Intel part's flat clock profile suggests a constant-performance design, while the NVIDIA part's wide boost range indicates adaptive performance scaling. The NVIDIA part's FP32 and FP16 throughput are identical at 24.02 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part's FP16 is exactly double its FP32 (8.192 versus 4.096 TFLOPS), indicating a 2:1 ratio.

The bus interfaces differ as well. The Intel card uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the NVIDIA IGP uses PCIe 5.0 x16, a generational and width advantage for the NVIDIA part. The NVIDIA part is an IGP, meaning it has no slot width, no power connectors, and no dimensions listed, while the Intel card is a single-slot, 265 mm by 127 mm by 20 mm board with a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested power supply. The Intel part's TDP is 130 W, while the NVIDIA part's TDP is unknown.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 5120 shading units, which is 5 times the 1024 shading units found in the Intel Arc A380E x2.

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

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory. The NVIDIA part's capacity is over 20 times larger.

Q: Which processor supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating no graphics API support.

Q: How does the FP32 performance compare?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 delivers 4.096 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA part has approximately 5.9 times the FP32 throughput.

Q: What are the display output capabilities of each?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 provides 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM provides 1x HDMI output.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 273.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth, compared to 186.0 GB/s for the Intel Arc A380E x2. The NVIDIA part's bandwidth is 47% higher.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field in the database. The process node differs: Intel uses 6 nm, NVIDIA uses 5 nm, both at TSMC. The die size differs substantially: Intel's DG2-128 is 157 mm², while NVIDIA's GB20B is 382 mm². The transistor count is listed only for Intel at 7,200 million, with NVIDIA's transistor count unknown. Transistor density is 45.9 million per mm² for Intel, with no value for NVIDIA.

The clock specifications are entirely different. Intel's base and boost clocks are both 2000 MHz, while NVIDIA's base is 741 MHz and boost is 2346 MHz. Memory clocks differ: Intel uses 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective), NVIDIA uses 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective). Memory size, type, and bus width all differ: Intel has 6 GB GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, NVIDIA has 128 GB LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus. Memory bandwidth is 186.0 GB/s for Intel versus 273.2 GB/s for NVIDIA.

Compute unit counts are all higher on the NVIDIA part. Shading units: 1024 versus 5120. TMUs: 64 versus 320. ROPs: 32 versus 40. RT cores: 8 versus 40. Tensor cores: none listed for Intel, 160 for NVIDIA. Pixel rate: 64.00 GPixel/s versus 93.84 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 128.0 GTexel/s versus 750.7 GTexel/s. FP32: 4.096 TFLOPS versus 24.02 TFLOPS. FP16: 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 24.02 TFLOPS (1:1).

The physical and power characteristics are also different. Intel has a TDP of 130 W, a single-slot form factor, a 1x 6-pin power connector, and a 300 W suggested PSU. NVIDIA has unknown TDP, an IGP form factor, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The bus interface differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for Intel, PCIe 5.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs differ: 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 for Intel, 1x HDMI for NVIDIA. API support differs: Intel has DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while NVIDIA lists N/A for all three. Dimensions are listed for Intel (265 mm by 127 mm by 20 mm) but not for NVIDIA. Production status differs: Intel is end-of-life, NVIDIA is active. Release dates differ: Intel released on 2024-03-31, NVIDIA on 2026-05-31.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries, and the wins counter shows zero for both items. The benchmark scores are both zero, and the percentile versus all GPUs is 50 for both. With no direct measurements available, the analysis must rely on the specification data to infer relative performance. The recorded data does, however, allow for a meaningful comparison of theoretical peak throughput and memory characteristics.

The largest advantage for the NVIDIA N1X 40SM is in texture processing. Its texture rate of 750.7 GTexel/s is 5.9 times the Intel Arc A380E x2's 128.0 GTexel/s. This disparity comes from the NVIDIA part's 320 TMUs versus 64 TMUs, combined with its higher boost clock. In any texture-bound workload, the NVIDIA part would complete the same amount of work in roughly one-sixth the time.

The FP32 compute advantage is similarly large. The NVIDIA part's 24.02 TFLOPS is 5.9 times the Intel part's 4.096 TFLOPS. For general-purpose compute, AI inference, or simulation workloads, the NVIDIA part's raw arithmetic throughput is in a different class. The FP16 comparison is also lopsided: 24.02 TFLOPS versus 8.192 TFLOPS, a 2.9 times advantage for NVIDIA.

The pixel rate difference is smaller but still significant. The NVIDIA part's 93.84 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s represents a 47% advantage. This is driven by the NVIDIA part's 40 ROPs versus 32 ROPs, plus its higher clock. For fill-rate-limited scenarios, the NVIDIA part holds a clear edge.

Memory bandwidth favors the NVIDIA part at 273.2 GB/s versus 186.0 GB/s, a 47% advantage. The memory capacity difference is the most extreme specification gap: 128 GB versus 6 GB, a 21.3 times difference. For workloads that require large in-memory datasets, the Intel part would be severely constrained, while the NVIDIA part can hold vast amounts of data.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 does hold advantages in certain areas. Its base clock of 2000 MHz is 2.7 times higher than the NVIDIA part's 741 MHz base clock. Its memory clock of 1937 MHz is 1.8 times higher than the NVIDIA part's 1067 MHz. Its display output count of 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 versus 1x HDMI is a major advantage for multi-display configurations. Its API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 versus N/A for NVIDIA means it can run graphics applications that the NVIDIA part cannot. Its smaller die size of 157 mm² versus 382 mm² and its known transistor count of 7,200 million versus unknown for NVIDIA provide a more transparent manufacturing profile.

The RT core count difference is 5 times in favor of NVIDIA (40 versus 8), and the tensor core presence is exclusive to NVIDIA (160 versus none). These features indicate that the NVIDIA part is designed for ray tracing and AI acceleration, while the Intel part has limited RT capability and no tensor cores.

The Verdict

The data indicates that these two processors serve entirely different markets, and the choice between them depends on the workload requirements. The Intel Arc A380E x2 is a discrete graphics card with full graphics API support, multiple display outputs, and a compact single-slot design. It is the appropriate choice for systems that need a functional GPU for standard graphics workloads, multi-monitor output, or legacy application compatibility. Its 130 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU requirement make it a conventional add-in card, and its end-of-life production status indicates it is a mature product.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM is an integrated processor with massive compute resources, 128 GB of memory, and no graphics API support. It is the appropriate choice for compute-centric applications that do not require traditional graphics rendering. Its 24.02 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 throughput, 160 tensor cores, and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth point to AI, data processing, or high-performance computing roles. Its IGP form factor with no power connectors and no dimensions suggests it is soldered onto a motherboard or system-on-chip design.

From the recorded data, the NVIDIA N1X 40SM is the superior compute processor by nearly every measurable metric: shading units, TMUs, ROPs, RT cores, tensor cores, pixel rate, texture rate, FP32, FP16, memory size, memory bandwidth, and bus interface. The Intel Arc A380E x2 is the superior graphics card by the metrics that matter for display and API compatibility: 8x display outputs, DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4, and a fixed 2000 MHz clock for consistent performance.

The choice is therefore clear. If the workload requires graphics rendering, multi-display output, or standard GPU APIs, the Intel Arc A380E x2 is the only option that provides those features. If the workload requires maximum compute throughput, large memory capacity, or tensor core acceleration, the NVIDIA N1X 40SM is the only option that provides those capabilities. The two products do not compete in the same segment, and the specification data confirms that they are complementary rather than rival solutions.