Intel Arc A380E x2 vs NVIDIA RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents two fundamentally different GPU designs with distinct positioning. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses a dual-GPU configuration of the DG2-128 chip, while the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation is a single, larger AD104 die. The RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation holds a decisive advantage in raw compute metrics, delivering 23.04 TFLOPS of FP32 performance compared to 4.096 TFLOPS for the Intel solution. This represents a 5.6x difference in raw shader throughput. The RTX 3500 also leads in memory bandwidth at 432.0 GB/s versus 186.0 GB/s, a 2.3x advantage. The Intel product is designated as end-of-life, while the NVIDIA part remains active in production. Based on the specification data alone, the RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation is the stronger choice for compute-intensive workloads, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 offers a compact, single-slot form factor with eight display outputs for multi-display configurations.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and foundry processes. Intel uses the Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process, featuring the DG2-128 chip that measures 157 mm² and contains 7,200 million transistors. This yields a transistor density of 45.9 million transistors per square millimeter. NVIDIA's RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process, with the AD104 chip measuring 294 mm² and containing 35,800 million transistors. The transistor density reaches 121.8 million per square millimeter, indicating a much denser implementation.

The Intel chip integrates 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. It does not list tensor cores in the database. The NVIDIA chip contains 5,120 shading units, 160 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 40 ray tracing cores, and 160 tensor cores. The shading unit count alone shows a 5x difference in favor of NVIDIA.

Memory configurations differ substantially. Intel pairs the DG2-128 with 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, running at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective data rate. NVIDIA pairs AD104 with 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, running at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate. The NVIDIA memory subsystem provides more than double the capacity and 2.3x the bandwidth.

The FP16 compute ratio also differs. Intel delivers 8.192 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32. NVIDIA delivers 23.04 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. This means NVIDIA's FP16 throughput matches its FP32 throughput, while Intel halves its FP16 rate relative to FP32.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation wins across every raw performance metric recorded in the database. Its FP32 throughput of 23.04 TFLOPS dwarfs the Intel solution's 4.096 TFLOPS. The pixel rate of 144.0 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s gives NVIDIA a 2.25x advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios. Texture rate favors NVIDIA at 360.0 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s, a 2.8x lead. Ray tracing hardware favors NVIDIA with 40 RT cores versus 8, and the tensor core count of 160 gives NVIDIA a clear edge in AI-accelerated workloads that Intel cannot match since it lists no tensor cores.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 wins in form factor flexibility and display connectivity. It occupies a single slot with dimensions of 265 mm by 127 mm by 20 mm, uses a single 6-pin power connector, and provides eight mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The NVIDIA part is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no display outputs and no power connectors. For multi-display installations or systems requiring a discrete card with video output capability, the Intel solution is the only one of the two that provides such functionality.

Clock behavior favors Intel in base frequency. The Intel GPU runs at 2000 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost, a fixed clock. The NVIDIA GPU runs at 1725 MHz base and 2250 MHz boost, showing a wider frequency range with a higher peak. Intel's fixed 2000 MHz may simplify thermal management, while NVIDIA's 2250 MHz boost provides the higher ceiling.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation delivers 23.04 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is 5.6x higher than the Intel Arc A380E x2's 4.096 TFLOPS.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The NVIDIA part offers 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part offers 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports display output?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 provides eight mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation has no display outputs and is classified as an IGP.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Intel GPU has a TDP of 130 W and requires a single 6-pin power connector. The NVIDIA GPU has a TDP of 100 W with no power connectors listed. Both have a suggested PSU rating of 300 W.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation has 40 ray tracing cores, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 has 8 ray tracing cores.

Q: What are the production statuses?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 is end-of-life, while the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation is active. Intel's release date is 2024-03-31, and NVIDIA's release date is 2023-03-20.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct benchmark scores for either GPU, so the analysis relies on the specification-derived metrics. The largest advantage for NVIDIA appears in FP32 compute. The RTX 3500 delivers 23.04 TFLOPS versus 4.096 TFLOPS for Intel. This 5.6x gap reflects the difference in shading units: 5,120 versus 1,024. The FP16 comparison shows 23.04 TFLOPS versus 8.192 TFLOPS, a 2.8x lead for NVIDIA, though the comparison is complicated by Intel's 2:1 ratio and NVIDIA's 1:1 ratio.

Memory bandwidth provides the second-largest gap. NVIDIA's 432.0 GB/s is 2.3x the Intel figure of 186.0 GB/s. The bus width difference, 192-bit versus 96-bit, and the effective memory rate, 18 Gbps versus 15.5 Gbps, both contribute. Texture rate favors NVIDIA at 360.0 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s, a 2.8x difference driven by 160 TMUs versus 64 TMUs. Pixel rate favors NVIDIA at 144.0 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s, a 2.25x difference from 64 ROPs versus 32 ROPs.

Ray tracing hardware shows NVIDIA with 40 RT cores versus 8 for Intel, a 5x difference. Tensor cores exist only on the NVIDIA side with 160 units. Intel lists no tensor core count.

The Intel GPU counters in clock speed. Its 2000 MHz base and boost clocks exceed NVIDIA's 1725 MHz base clock, though NVIDIA's 2250 MHz boost surpasses Intel's fixed 2000 MHz. Intel's transistor density is lower at 45.9 million per square millimeter versus NVIDIA's 121.8 million per square millimeter. The die size difference, 157 mm² versus 294 mm², means Intel packs fewer transistors into a smaller area.

Power draw favors NVIDIA despite its higher performance. The RTX 3500 lists a TDP of 100 W, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 lists 130 W. Both suggest a 300 W PSU. The NVIDIA part uses no power connectors, while Intel requires one 6-pin connector.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The process node differs: Intel uses 6 nm, NVIDIA uses 5 nm, both from TSMC. Transistor counts differ substantially: 7,200 million for Intel versus 35,800 million for NVIDIA. Die size: 157 mm² versus 294 mm². Transistor density: 45.9 million per square millimeter versus 121.8 million per square millimeter.

Clock speeds show Intel at 2000 MHz base and boost, NVIDIA at 1725 MHz base and 2250 MHz boost. Memory clock: Intel at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective, NVIDIA at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective.

Memory capacity: 6 GB versus 12 GB. Memory type is GDDR6 for both. Bus width: 96-bit versus 192-bit. Bandwidth: 186.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s.

Shader resources: 1,024 shading units versus 5,120. TMUs: 64 versus 160. ROPs: 32 versus 64. Ray tracing cores: 8 versus 40. Tensor cores: none listed versus 160.

Pixel rate: 64.00 GPixel/s versus 144.0 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 128.0 GTexel/s versus 360.0 GTexel/s. FP32: 4.096 TFLOPS versus 23.04 TFLOPS. FP16: 8.192 TFLOPS versus 23.04 TFLOPS.

TDP: 130 W versus 100 W. Slot width: single-slot versus IGP. Power connectors: one 6-pin versus none. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs: eight mini-DisplayPort 2.0 versus no outputs.

Dimensions: Intel measures 265 mm by 127 mm by 20 mm; NVIDIA lists no dimensions. Production status: end-of-life versus active. Release dates: 2024-03-31 for Intel versus 2023-03-20 for NVIDIA. Predecessor: Xe Graphics versus Ampere-MW. Successor: Battlemage versus Blackwell-MW.

Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both use PCIe 4.0. Both have a 300 W suggested PSU. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database.