Intel Arc A380M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380M and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 occupy completely different segments of the mobile graphics market, and their respective strengths are defined by their physical and architectural limits rather than by overlapping performance targets.

The Intel Arc A380M is designed for maximum efficiency in a constrained power envelope. Its 35 W TDP and MXM Module slot width indicate a part intended for compact, portable systems where thermal headroom is scarce. The data shows this GPU delivers 4.096 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 8.192 TFLOPS of FP16 performance, which places it in the entry-level tier of the Arc 3 Mobile lineup. Its 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus produces 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth, a figure suited for 1080p-class gaming at medium settings rather than high-refresh or high-resolution workloads.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103, by contrast, is a high-performance part with a 200 W TDP and a Dual-slot form factor. It delivers 29.15 TFLOPS of FP32 and the same 29.15 TFLOPS for FP16, reflecting a 1:1 ratio that indicates full-rate execution for both precision formats. Its 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus provides 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth, more than 2.7 times the bandwidth of the Intel part. The RTX 4070 AD103 also carries 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-based features that the Arc A380M cannot match in scope.

The use-case split is stark. For workloads that demand raw compute throughput, high memory bandwidth, or extensive ray tracing, the RTX 4070 AD103 is the only viable option between the two. For ultra-portable systems, fanless designs, or applications where power draw is the primary constraint, the Arc A380M offers a functional baseline with modern API support. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, matching the API feature set of the NVIDIA card, so software compatibility is not a differentiator. The deciding factor is performance per watt, where the Arc A380M's 35 W envelope versus the RTX 4070 AD103's 200 W envelope shows an order-of-magnitude difference in power scaling.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and use different manufacturing processes. The Intel Arc A380M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-128 chip, fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process. It contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD103 chip, also fabricated by TSMC but on a 5 nm process. This part contains 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, for a density of 121.1 million transistors per square millimeter. The density gap, 121.1M versus 45.9M per mm², reflects the newer process node and the architectural complexity of Ada Lovelace.

Core configuration differences are substantial. The Arc A380M has 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. It also includes 8 RT cores for ray tracing. The RTX 4070 AD103 has 5,888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, along with 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores. The shading unit advantage is nearly 5.75 times in favor of NVIDIA, and the tensor core count of 184 versus zero in the Intel part indicates a fundamental difference in AI processing capability. The Arc A380M does not list tensor cores in its specifications, meaning any AI-accelerated workloads would rely on shader-based computation.

Memory architecture also diverges. The Arc A380M uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, with a memory clock of 1937 MHz and 15.5 Gbps effective data rate. The RTX 4070 AD103 uses 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus, with a memory clock of 1313 MHz and 21 Gbps effective data rate. The bus width doubling and the higher effective data rate produce 504.2 GB/s versus 186.0 GB/s, a 2.71 times bandwidth advantage for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds differ as well. The Arc A380M has a base clock of 1550 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz. The RTX 4070 AD103 has a base clock of 1920 MHz and a boost clock of 2475 MHz. The higher boost clock on the NVIDIA part, combined with its larger core count, explains the massive FP32 throughput gap: 29.15 TFLOPS versus 4.096 TFLOPS, a 7.11 times difference.

Power delivery and connectivity also separate the two. The Arc A380M uses an MXM-A (3.1) bus interface and has no listed power connectors, consistent with its 35 W TDP. The RTX 4070 AD103 uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and requires a single 16-pin power connector, with a suggested power supply of 550 W. The display outputs also differ: the Arc A380M's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," while the RTX 4070 AD103 offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data for these two GPUs is sparse, with no head-to-head benchmark entries and no average benchmark scores for either part. The percentile versus all GPUs is 50 for both, which indicates median positioning in the overall distribution, but this figure does not provide comparative performance between the two specific units. Without direct benchmark scores, the analysis must rely on the raw specification data.

The FP32 compute difference is the clearest indicator. The RTX 4070 AD103 delivers 29.15 TFLOPS, which is 7.11 times the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Arc A380M. In FP16, the NVIDIA part maintains 29.15 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the Intel part achieves 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). The NVIDIA card is 3.56 times faster in FP16, and its 1:1 ratio means no throughput penalty for using FP16 compared to FP32, whereas the Intel part halves its throughput when moving from FP32 to FP16.

Texture and pixel rates follow the same pattern. The RTX 4070 AD103 has a texture rate of 455.4 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s for the Arc A380M, a 3.56 times difference. The pixel rate is 158.4 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s, a 2.48 times difference. The fill rate gaps are smaller than the compute gaps, which suggests that the memory bandwidth constraint affects the NVIDIA part more proportionally, though its 504.2 GB/s still dwarfs the 186.0 GB/s of the Intel card.

Memory bandwidth shows a 2.71 times advantage for NVIDIA. The RTX 4070 AD103's 12 GB capacity is double the 6 GB of the Arc A380M, which matters for texture-heavy scenes and larger datasets. The GDDR6X memory type also provides higher effective data rates than the GDDR6 used by Intel.

The RT core count difference is 46 versus 8, a 5.75 times advantage for NVIDIA. Tensor cores exist only on the NVIDIA part, with 184 units, while the Intel part lists none. This makes the RTX 4070 AD103 the only option for DLSS-style upscaling or other tensor-core-accelerated features. The API support is identical: both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so there is no compatibility gap in modern graphics APIs.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 AD103 is the superior performer in nearly every measurable specification. It has more shading units, more RT cores, more tensor cores, higher clock speeds, double the memory capacity, more than 2.7 times the memory bandwidth, and more than 7 times the FP32 compute throughput. For any workload that scales with raw compute, memory bandwidth, or ray tracing capability, the RTX 4070 AD103 wins decisively.

The Intel Arc A380M, however, is not without purpose. Its 35 W TDP makes it suitable for systems where power consumption is the dominant constraint. The MXM Module form factor and portable-device-dependent display outputs indicate a design for specialized mobile platforms rather than general-purpose laptops. Its 6 GB memory and 186.0 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for entry-level gaming or basic compute tasks, and its API support matches the NVIDIA part for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The production status also differs. The Arc A380M is listed as Active, while the RTX 4070 AD103 is End-of-life. The NVIDIA part was released on 2024-02-29, with a launch MSRP of 599 USD, while the Intel part was released on 2023-01-23. The predecessor and successor fields for NVIDIA list GeForce 30 and GeForce 50, respectively, while the Intel part has no predecessor or successor listed.

For users requiring maximum performance in a dual-slot, 200 W form factor, the RTX 4070 AD103 is the clear choice based on the specification data. For users constrained to a 35 W power envelope and an MXM module, the Arc A380M is the only option presented here. The choice is not between equal competitors but between two different classes of hardware designed for different use cases.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4070 AD103 in FP32 compute compared to the Arc A380M?

A: The RTX 4070 AD103 delivers 29.15 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Arc A380M delivers 4.096 TFLOPS. This makes the NVIDIA part 7.11 times faster in FP32.

Q: What are the memory specifications for both GPUs?

A: The Arc A380M has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4070 AD103 has 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A380M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Arc A380M includes 8 RT cores. However, the RTX 4070 AD103 includes 46 RT cores, which is 5.75 times more.

Q: What power draw does each GPU require?

A: The Arc A380M has a TDP of 35 W. The RTX 4070 AD103 has a TDP of 200 W and requires a power supply of 550 W.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: Only the RTX 4070 AD103 has tensor cores, with 184 units. The Arc A380M does not list any tensor cores in its specifications.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The Arc A380M is listed as Active, while the RTX 4070 AD103 is listed as End-of-life. The NVIDIA part was released on 2024-02-29, and the Intel part was released on 2023-01-23.