Intel Arc A380E x2 vs NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the Intel Arc A380E x2 and the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation. The recorded data shows zero wins for either side in matched comparisons, and the average benchmark score field is empty for both entries. This absence of direct measurements means the comparison must rely entirely on the architectural specifications and compute characteristics recorded in the database.

The most striking numerical contrast appears in raw compute throughput. The NVIDIA part delivers 12.99 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel part delivers 4.096 TFLOPS. That places the NVIDIA GPU at roughly 3.17 times the FP32 throughput of the Intel GPU, based strictly on the recorded figures. The FP16 comparison follows a different pattern: the NVIDIA GPU maintains the same 12.99 TFLOPS in FP16 with a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel GPU reaches 8.192 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. In FP16 workloads, the NVIDIA part still leads, but the margin narrows to approximately 1.59 times.

Memory bandwidth shows a similar directional advantage. The RTX 2000 Mobile records 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Arc A380E x2 records 186.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA part holds a 70 GB/s advantage, which translates to roughly 1.38 times the bandwidth of the Intel part. The memory capacity also differs: 8 GB on the NVIDIA side versus 6 GB on the Intel side. The bus width differs as well, with 128 bit on the NVIDIA GPU and 96 bit on the Intel GPU.

Pixel and texture throughput reinforce the NVIDIA advantage. The RTX 2000 Mobile reaches 101.5 GPixel/s and 203.0 GTexel/s, while the Arc A380E x2 reaches 64.00 GPixel/s and 128.0 GTexel/s. These figures indicate the NVIDIA GPU processes pixels at roughly 1.59 times the rate of the Intel GPU, and textures at about 1.59 times as well. The shading unit count also favors NVIDIA: 3072 shading units versus 1024 on the Intel part, a 3-to-1 ratio. The TMU count is 96 versus 64, and the ROP count is 48 versus 32.

Clock speeds present a more nuanced picture. The Intel GPU operates at a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz, meaning it does not vary its clock under load according to the recorded data. The NVIDIA GPU has a base clock of 1635 MHz and a boost clock of 2115 MHz. At base clock, the Intel part runs 365 MHz higher, but at boost clock, the NVIDIA part runs 115 MHz higher. The memory clock also differs, with the Intel part at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) and the NVIDIA part at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective).

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380E x2 wins in the category of base clock speed, operating at 2000 MHz compared to the NVIDIA base of 1635 MHz. This suggests that in workloads where boost behavior is not sustained, the Intel GPU maintains a steady clock rate. The Intel part also has a wider display output configuration, supporting 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0, which is a significant advantage for multi-display setups. The NVIDIA part lists display outputs as "Portable Device Dependent," indicating its outputs are not fixed in the database.

The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation wins in nearly every raw performance metric recorded in the database. It leads in FP32 throughput (12.99 versus 4.096 TFLOPS), FP16 throughput (12.99 versus 8.192 TFLOPS), memory capacity (8 GB versus 6 GB), memory bandwidth (256.0 versus 186.0 GB/s), pixel rate (101.5 versus 64.00 GPixel/s), texture rate (203.0 versus 128.0 GTexel/s), shading units (3072 versus 1024), TMUs (96 versus 64), ROPs (48 versus 32), and boost clock (2115 versus 2000 MHz). The NVIDIA GPU also features dedicated tensor cores (96) and a higher count of RT cores (24 versus 8), which the Intel part does not list tensor cores at all.

The transistor density data reveals another point of difference. The NVIDIA chip, AD107, packs 18,900 million transistors into a 159 mm² die, yielding a density of 118.9M / mm². The Intel chip, DG2-128, contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a density of 45.9M / mm². The NVIDIA chip achieves roughly 2.59 times the transistor density of the Intel chip. This density advantage likely contributes to the NVIDIA GPU's higher compute throughput per unit area, although the database does not provide direct efficiency measurements.

Power consumption shows a major divergence. The Intel Arc A380E x2 has a TDP of 130 W and requires a 1x 6-pin power connector with a suggested PSU of 300 W. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile has a TDP of 50 W and requires no power connectors, as it is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) form factor. The NVIDIA part uses roughly 38% of the power budget of the Intel part while delivering significantly higher compute throughput, suggesting a substantially better performance-per-watt profile based on the recorded specifications. The form factor also differs: the Intel part is single-slot with dimensions of 265 mm length, 127 mm height, and 20 mm width, while the NVIDIA part has no recorded dimensions and is classified as IGP.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural generations. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the DG2-128 chip based on the Xe-HPG architecture, belonging to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation uses the AD107 chip based on the Ada Lovelace architecture, belonging to the Ada-MW generation. Both are manufactured by TSMC, but on different process nodes: the Intel part uses 6 nm, while the NVIDIA part uses 5 nm. The smaller process node on the NVIDIA side contributes to its higher transistor density, despite the die sizes being nearly identical (157 mm² for Intel, 159 mm² for NVIDIA).

The transistor counts differ by a factor of roughly 2.6, with NVIDIA at 18,900 million and Intel at 7,200 million. This disparity in transistor budget allows the NVIDIA GPU to implement a larger array of functional units, including 3072 shading units, 96 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 24 RT cores, and 96 tensor cores. The Intel GPU implements 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 RT cores, with no tensor cores listed.

Memory architecture also differs. The Intel part uses 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, while the NVIDIA part uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus. The wider bus on the NVIDIA GPU directly contributes to its higher bandwidth figure. The effective memory speed is similar: 15.5 Gbps for Intel and 16 Gbps for NVIDIA, but the wider bus gives the NVIDIA part the bandwidth advantage.

The PCIe interface differs as well. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x16. This means the NVIDIA GPU has twice the PCIe lane bandwidth available for host communication, which could matter for data transfer-intensive workloads. The NVIDIA part is also classified as an IGP, meaning it is designed to be integrated into a portable device, whereas the Intel part is a standalone single-slot card.

Both GPUs support the same API feature set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The production status differs: the Intel part is end-of-life with a release date of 2024-03-31, while the NVIDIA part is active with a release date of 2023-03-20. Their predecessors and successors also differ: the Intel part succeeded Xe Graphics and was followed by Battlemage, while the NVIDIA part succeeded Ampere-MW and was followed by Blackwell-MW.

The Verdict

The recorded data clearly indicates that the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation outperforms the Intel Arc A380E x2 across nearly every measurable specification. The FP32 throughput difference alone, 12.99 TFLOPS versus 4.096 TFLOPS, suggests that the NVIDIA GPU is the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads such as rendering, simulation, or any FP32-dominant task. The FP16 advantage, while smaller at 12.99 versus 8.192 TFLOPS, still favors NVIDIA. The memory capacity and bandwidth advantages (8 GB, 256.0 GB/s versus 6 GB, 186.0 GB/s) indicate that the NVIDIA GPU can handle larger datasets and move data faster, which matters for texture-heavy scenes or large model inference.

The power envelope, however, tells a different story. The NVIDIA GPU operates at 50 W TDP, while the Intel GPU operates at 130 W TDP. This means the NVIDIA part delivers more than three times the FP32 throughput while consuming less than half the power budget. For portable or power-constrained environments, the NVIDIA GPU is the clear choice based on the recorded specifications. The NVIDIA part also requires no power connectors and is classified as an IGP, making it suitable for thin-and-light designs.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 does have specific advantages. Its base clock of 2000 MHz is higher than the NVIDIA base of 1635 MHz, which might benefit workloads that rely on sustained clocks without boost variability. Its 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 output configuration is a unique feature that supports many simultaneous displays, which the NVIDIA part cannot match due to its portable-device-dependent outputs. For multi-display professional setups, the Intel part offers a distinct connectivity advantage.

The absence of tensor cores on the Intel part, versus 96 tensor cores on the NVIDIA part, means the NVIDIA GPU is better positioned for AI and machine learning workloads that leverage tensor operations. The RT core count also favors NVIDIA (24 versus 8), indicating stronger ray tracing capability. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate, so the feature set for modern games is nominally equal, but the raw compute and memory advantages of the NVIDIA GPU would likely translate to better real-world performance in most scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation, with 12.99 TFLOPS compared to the Intel Arc A380E x2's 4.096 TFLOPS.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare between the two?

A: The NVIDIA GPU has 256.0 GB/s, while the Intel GPU has 186.0 GB/s, a difference of 70 GB/s in favor of NVIDIA.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 has a TDP of 130 W and requires a 1x 6-pin power connector with a 300 W suggested PSU. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile has a TDP of 50 W and requires no power connectors.

Q: Does the Intel GPU have tensor cores?

A: No, the Intel Arc A380E x2 does not list tensor cores, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile has 96 tensor cores.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The Intel DG2-128 uses a 6 nm process, and the NVIDIA AD107 uses a 5 nm process, both from TSMC.

Q: How many display outputs does each GPU support?

A: The Intel GPU supports 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0, while the NVIDIA GPU's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent."

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Arc A380E x2 | NVIDIA RTX 2000 Mobile Ada Generation |

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

| Chip | DG2-128 | AD107 |

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Ada Lovelace |

| Generation | Alchemist (Arc 3) | Ada-MW |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 18,900 million |

| Die Size | 157 mm² | 159 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 45.9M / mm² | 118.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2000 MHz | 1635 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2000 MHz | 2115 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1937 MHz 15.5 Gbps effective | 2000 MHz 16 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 96 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 186.0 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 3072 |

| TMUs | 64 | 96 |

| ROPs | 32 | 48 |

| RT Cores | 8 | 24 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 96 |

| Pixel Rate | 64.00 GPixel/s | 101.5 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 128.0 GTexel/s | 203.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.096 TFLOPS | 12.99 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) | 12.99 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 130 W | 50 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 | Not recorded |

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

| Release Date | 2024-03-31 | 2023-03-20 |

| Predecessor | Xe Graphics | Ampere-MW |

| Successor | Battlemage | Blackwell-MW |