Intel Arc A380M vs Intel Arc G3 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for the Intel Arc A380M versus the Intel Arc G3. Both entries list an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50 among all GPUs. Neither product has any nearest rivals populated in the database, and the win counts for each side are zero. This means a direct performance comparison must rely on the recorded specifications rather than measured workloads.

The Intel Arc A380M delivers a FP32 compute rate of 4.096 TFLOPS, while the Intel Arc G3 reaches 6.144 TFLOPS. That gives the G3 a 50% advantage in raw floating-point throughput (6.144 divided by 4.096 equals 1.5, which is 50% more). In FP16 workloads, the A380M produces 8.192 TFLOPS under a 2:1 ratio, while the G3 produces 12.29 TFLOPS under the same 2:1 ratio. That is also a 50% lead for the G3. The G3 uses 1280 shading units against 1024 on the A380M, which explains its higher compute ceiling.

Texture throughput favors the A380M. The A380M sustains 128.0 GTexel/s, while the G3 sustains 96.00 GTexel/s. That gives the A380M a 33% lead in texture fill rate (128.0 divided by 96.00 equals 1.333). The A380M has 64 texture mapping units versus 40 on the G3, so its advantage here is structural rather than clock-based. Pixel throughput also goes to the A380M: 64.00 GPixel/s against 48.00 GPixel/s, a 33% margin. The A380M has 32 raster output units versus 20 on the G3.

Clock behavior differs sharply. The A380M runs a base clock of 1550 MHz and boosts to 2000 MHz. The G3 has a much lower base of 300 MHz but boosts to 2400 MHz. The G3's boost clock is 20% higher than the A380M's boost clock, yet its lower base indicates a wider dynamic range. Memory bandwidth is not comparable in absolute terms: the A380M uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the G3 uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent.

Ray tracing hardware favors the G3. The G3 includes 10 ray tracing cores, while the A380M includes 8. That is a 25% higher RT core count for the G3. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature levels match. Power draw favors the G3 significantly: 25 W against 35 W for the A380M, a 29% lower TDP.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute?

A: The Intel Arc G3 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS in FP32, which is 50% higher than the Intel Arc A380M's 4.096 TFLOPS.

Q: Which GPU offers better texture fill performance?

A: The Intel Arc A380M reaches 128.0 GTexel/s, which is 33% higher than the Intel Arc G3's 96.00 GTexel/s. The A380M also has 64 TMUs versus 40 on the G3.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The A380M uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth. The G3 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth and no dedicated memory size or bus width.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The A380M has a TDP of 35 W, while the G3 has a TDP of 25 W. The G3 draws 29% less power according to these rated values.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The Intel Arc G3 has 10 RT cores, while the Intel Arc A380M has 8. The G3 carries a 25% higher RT core count.

Q: Are both GPUs on the same manufacturing process?

A: No. The A380M uses TSMC's 6 nm process, while the G3 uses Intel's 3 nm process. The A380M has 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, while the G3's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380M wins in texture and pixel throughput. Its 128.0 GTexel/s and 64.00 GPixel/s rates exceed the G3's 96.00 GTexel/s and 48.00 GPixel/s. This suggests workloads that rely heavily on fill rate, such as older games with high texture detail or certain compute tasks that saturate TMUs and ROPs, would favor the A380M. The A380M also has dedicated GDDR6 memory with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth, which removes the variable of system memory performance and provides a fixed memory pipeline.

The Intel Arc G3 wins in compute throughput and ray tracing. Its 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 are both 50% higher than the A380M's figures. The G3 also has 10 RT cores versus 8 on the A380M, so ray-traced workloads have more parallel hardware available. The G3's 2400 MHz boost clock is 20% higher than the A380M's 2000 MHz, which helps in bursty workloads that can sustain high clocks.

Power efficiency as a ratio of compute per watt favors the G3. It delivers 6.144 TFLOPS at 25 W, which is 0.246 TFLOPS per watt. The A380M delivers 4.096 TFLOPS at 35 W, which is 0.117 TFLOPS per watt. The G3 achieves roughly double the FP32 efficiency per watt based on these recorded figures.

The A380M holds an advantage in dedicated memory capacity and bandwidth. Six gigabytes of GDDR6 at 186.0 GB/s is a fixed resource, whereas the G3 depends on system shared memory that varies with the host platform. For applications that need consistent memory bandwidth regardless of system configuration, the A380M provides a more predictable environment.

The G3 wins on form factor suitability for low-power integration. Its 25 W TDP and IGP slot width, with no power connectors, make it suitable for compact portable devices. The A380M draws 35 W and uses an MXM module form factor with MXM-A (3.1) bus interface, which requires a module slot rather than being integrated directly onto the processor package.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification. The A380M uses the DG2-128 chip with Xe-HPG architecture, while the G3 uses the Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture. The A380M belongs to the Alchemist generation under Arc 3 Mobile, while the G3 belongs to Arc Graphics-M under Panther Lake.

Process node differs: the A380M is fabricated on 6 nm by TSMC, and the G3 is fabricated on 3 nm by Intel. The A380M has 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The G3 lists unknown transistor count and die size.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The A380M runs at 1550 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost. The G3 runs at 300 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the A380M runs at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective, while the G3 uses system shared memory with no dedicated clock.

Memory configuration is a major divergence. The A380M has 6 GB GDDR6, a 96-bit bus, and 186.0 GB/s bandwidth. The G3 has system shared memory, system shared type, system shared bus width, and system dependent bandwidth.

Compute unit counts differ: the A380M has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The G3 has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs. Ray tracing cores are 8 on the A380M and 10 on the G3. Neither has recorded tensor cores.

Pixel and texture rates follow the unit counts: the A380M sustains 64.00 GPixel/s and 128.0 GTexel/s, while the G3 sustains 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 4.096 TFLOPS on the A380M and 6.144 TFLOPS on the G3. FP16 compute is 8.192 TFLOPS on the A380M and 12.29 TFLOPS on the G3, both under a 2:1 ratio.

Power and form factor differ. The A380M has a 35 W TDP, MXM module slot width, no power connectors listed, and an MXM-A (3.1) bus interface. The G3 has a 25 W TDP, IGP slot width, no power connectors, and an IGP bus interface. Display outputs are portable device dependent for both.

Release dates differ: the A380M released on 2023-01-23, while the G3 releases on 2026-05-31. Both are listed as active production status. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database.

Architecture Differences

The A380M uses the Xe-HPG architecture from the Alchemist generation, built on the DG2-128 chip. The G3 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture from the Arc Graphics-M generation, built on the Panther Lake chip. This represents a generational shift in Intel's graphics architecture, from the first Arc discrete mobile design to the third-generation Xe core design.

Manufacturing differs by foundry and node. The A380M is produced by TSMC on a 6 nm process. The G3 is produced by Intel on a 3 nm process. The A380M's die is 157 mm² with 7,200 million transistors, while the G3's die size and transistor count are unknown. The A380M achieves a transistor density of 45.9M per mm², but the G3's density cannot be calculated without die size data.

The A380M has dedicated GDDR6 memory, which is a discrete memory architecture. The G3 uses system shared memory, indicating an integrated graphics design that shares system RAM. This architectural choice means the G3's memory performance depends entirely on the host system's memory configuration, while the A380M has fixed memory bandwidth.

Shader organization differs. The A380M has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The G3 has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs. The G3 packs more shading units into a smaller TMU and ROP count, which aligns with its higher FP32 output but lower fill rates.

Ray tracing hardware differs: the A380M has 8 RT cores, while the G3 has 10. The Xe3-LPG architecture in the G3 provides a 25% higher RT core count compared to the Xe-HPG architecture in the A380M.

Clock behavior reflects different design goals. The A380M has a narrow clock range from 1550 MHz to 2000 MHz. The G3 has a wide range from 300 MHz to 2400 MHz, indicating aggressive power management that can idle very low and boost very high. The G3's boost clock is 20% higher than the A380M's boost clock.

Power envelopes differ by 10 W: the A380M is rated at 35 W and the G3 at 25 W. Combined with the G3's higher FP32 output, the newer architecture achieves higher compute per watt. The A380M's higher fill rates at 35 W suggest its architecture allocates power differently, favoring texture and pixel work over raw compute.

API support matches exactly: both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The architectural differences do not affect the exposed API feature set.

The Verdict

The data shows two GPUs with opposing strengths. The Intel Arc A380M is a dedicated mobile graphics module with fixed GDDR6 memory, higher fill rates, and a larger ROP and TMU configuration. The Intel Arc G3 is an integrated graphics solution with higher compute throughput, more RT cores, and lower power draw.

Choose the A380M when the workload depends on texture and pixel throughput. Its 128.0 GTexel/s and 64.00 GPixel/s exceed the G3 by 33% in both metrics. The fixed 186.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 6 GB dedicated capacity provide predictable performance that does not vary with system memory. The MXM-A (3.1) form factor suits systems designed for replaceable graphics modules.

Choose the G3 when compute throughput matters more than fill rate. Its 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 represent a 50% advantage over the A380M. The 10 RT cores provide more ray tracing parallelism. The 25 W TDP and IGP form factor make it suitable for compact, power-constrained portable devices that do not support dedicated graphics modules.

The A380M released on 2023-01-23 and remains active. The G3 releases on 2026-05-31 and is also active. No benchmark scores exist for either GPU in the database, so these conclusions rest entirely on the recorded specifications. Neither GPU has a nearest rival populated, and both sit at the 50th percentile in the overall distribution, though that percentile reflects the empty benchmark fields rather than measured performance.

The specification-driven verdict: the G3 delivers superior compute and efficiency for ray tracing and general compute workloads, while the A380M delivers superior fill rate and fixed memory resources. A builder targeting high geometry throughput or rasterization-heavy tasks should favor the A380M. A builder targeting compute-heavy tasks, ray tracing, or minimal power draw should favor the G3. The 10 W TDP difference and the G3's higher boost clock further reinforce the G3 as the efficiency-oriented choice, while the A380M's dedicated memory and higher fill rates make it the throughput-oriented choice for specific workloads.