Intel Arc A530M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Comparison

The Intel Arc A530M and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti occupy opposite ends of the mobile and desktop GPU spectrum, with benchmark data showing a decisive performance gap favoring the NVIDIA part. The Arc A530M, a 65 W integrated solution from Intel’s Alchemist generation, delivers an average benchmark score of 46,614, placing it in the 85th percentile of all GPUs, while the RTX 3080 Ti, a 350 W dual-slot desktop card, averages 41,187 and sits in the 83rd percentile. Despite the RTX 3080 Ti’s lower percentile ranking, its raw scores in compute and graphics tests far exceed the Intel part, reflecting a fundamental difference in design targets, memory subsystems, and execution resources.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A530M has a higher average benchmark score of 46,614, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti’s 41,187, despite the latter’s much larger silicon and memory bandwidth.

Q: How does the Intel Arc A530M compare to its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 5600M?

A: The Arc A530M scores 46,614 on average, which is virtually identical to the RX 5600M’s 46,601, a deltaPct of 0. This places it in a dead heat with that AMD part.

Q: What is the single largest benchmark win for the RTX 3080 Ti over the Arc A530M?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the RTX 3080 Ti scores 192,697 versus the Arc A530M’s 43,492, a deltaPct of -77.4 for the Intel part, representing the largest relative margin in the head-to-head data.

Q: Does the RTX 3080 Ti’s higher memory bandwidth translate into a proportional score advantage?

A: No. The RTX 3080 Ti has a 912.4 GB/s bandwidth versus the Arc A530M’s 224.0 GB/s, but its average benchmark score is actually lower, indicating that memory bandwidth alone does not determine the composite score.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc A530M is listed as Active, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti is marked End-of-life, with the latter having a successor in the GeForce 40 series.

Q: Which GPU has more RT cores, and how does that relate to its score?

A: The RTX 3080 Ti has 80 RT cores versus the Arc A530M’s 12, and it wins both head-to-head compute tests, suggesting a strong correlation between RT core count and raw compute performance in these specific benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The Intel Arc A530M uses the Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process, packing 11,500 million transistors into a 269 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 42.8M per mm². In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti utilizes the Ampere architecture on an 8 nm Samsung process, with 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, for a slightly higher density of 45.1M per mm². The NVIDIA chip is more than twice the physical size and contains nearly 2.5 times the transistor count, but the Intel part achieves its density with a more advanced node.

Memory architecture differs starkly. The Arc A530M employs 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, producing 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the RTX 3080 Ti uses 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus, delivering 912.4 GB/s. The NVIDIA card also has a much wider execution pipeline: 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, versus the Intel part’s 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. RT core counts are 80 versus 12, and the RTX 3080 Ti uniquely features 320 tensor cores, which the Arc A530M lacks entirely.

Clock speeds favor NVIDIA as well. The RTX 3080 Ti runs at a 1,365 MHz base and 1,665 MHz boost, while the Arc A530M operates at 900 MHz base and 1,300 MHz boost. This yields a substantial difference in raw throughput: the NVIDIA card achieves 34.10 TFLOPS FP32 and 34.10 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1), whereas the Intel part delivers 3.994 TFLOPS FP32 and 7.987 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). Pixel and texture rates follow suit, with the RTX 3080 Ti reaching 186.5 GPixel/s and 532.8 GTexel/s, compared to 62.40 GPixel/s and 124.8 GTexel/s for the Arc A530M.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data includes only two tests, both of which the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti wins decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 3080 Ti scores 170,037, against the Arc A530M’s 49,735, resulting in a deltaPct of -70.8 for the Intel part. This means the NVIDIA GPU delivers roughly 3.4 times the OpenCL performance, a margin consistent with its 8.5x advantage in shading units and 8.5x higher FP32 throughput.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows an even wider gap. The RTX 3080 Ti posts 192,697, while the Arc A530M manages 43,492, a deltaPct of -77.4. In absolute terms, NVIDIA’s score is about 4.4 times higher, suggesting that the Vulkan workload scales even more aggressively with the NVIDIA card’s larger memory bus and higher clocks. These two wins give the RTX 3080 Ti a 2-0 record in head-to-head comparisons, with no tests favoring the Intel part.

Notably, the Arc A530M’s average benchmark score of 46,614 is higher than the RTX 3080 Ti’s 41,187, which appears contradictory given the head-to-head results. This discrepancy arises because the RTX 3080 Ti’s average includes scores from additional tests—such as Passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute—where its performance varies widely, from a low of 110 in Passmark DirectX 12 to a high of 26,896 in Passmark G3D. The Intel part’s average is based on only two Geekbench tests, which likely inflates its relative standing compared to a broader benchmark suite.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The process node is 6 nm for Intel versus 8 nm for NVIDIA, with foundries TSMC and Samsung respectively. Transistor counts are 11,500 million versus 28,300 million, and die sizes are 269 mm² versus 628 mm². Clock speeds show NVIDIA at 1,365 MHz base and 1,665 MHz boost, against Intel’s 900 MHz base and 1,300 MHz boost. Memory configurations are 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus versus 12 GB GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus, with bandwidths of 224.0 GB/s and 912.4 GB/s.

Compute resources diverge sharply: shading units are 1,536 versus 10,240, TMUs are 96 versus 320, and ROPs are 48 versus 112. RT cores number 12 versus 80, and tensor cores exist only on the NVIDIA part at 320. Pixel rate is 62.40 GPixel/s versus 186.5 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 124.8 GTexel/s versus 532.8 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 3.994 TFLOPS versus 34.10 TFLOPS, while FP16 is 7.987 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 34.10 TFLOPS (1:1). TDP is 65 W versus 350 W, slot width is IGP versus dual-slot, and the power connector is null for Intel versus 1x 12-pin for NVIDIA, with a suggested PSU of 750 W for the latter.

The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for Intel and PCIe 4.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are listed as portable device dependent for the Arc A530M, while the RTX 3080 Ti has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The NVIDIA card has physical dimensions of 285 mm length, 112 mm height, and 40 mm width, while the Intel part lists no dimensions. Production status is Active for Intel and End-of-life for NVIDIA, with release dates of July 31, 2023, and May 30, 2021, respectively.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti wins outright in every head-to-head benchmark recorded, making it the clear choice for raw compute performance. Its 34.10 TFLOPS FP32 and 912.4 GB/s bandwidth support workloads that demand massive parallel throughput, such as high-resolution rendering, complex simulations, and intensive GPGPU tasks. The 12 GB GDDR6X memory and 384-bit bus provide a substantial capacity and bandwidth advantage, which is critical for large datasets and high-texture games. The inclusion of 320 tensor cores also gives it a unique capability for AI-accelerated workloads, which the Arc A530M cannot match.

The Intel Arc A530M, despite losing both head-to-head tests, holds a higher average benchmark score and a better percentile ranking. Its 85th percentile versus the RTX 3080 Ti’s 83rd suggests that in a broader context, the Intel part performs more consistently across the specific benchmarks included in its average. Its 65 W TDP and IGP form factor make it suitable for compact or low-power systems, where the RTX 3080 Ti’s 350 W draw and dual-slot design would be impractical. The Arc A530M also has a more recent release date and active production status, indicating ongoing availability.

For gaming and general 3D workloads, the RTX 3080 Ti’s dominance in Vulkan and OpenCL is decisive, but for users prioritizing energy efficiency and a smaller footprint, the Arc A530M’s lower power envelope and integrated design offer a practical alternative. The data shows no scenario where the Intel part wins a benchmark, but its composite score and low TDP position it as a viable option for constrained environments, while the NVIDIA card excels in performance-hungry applications.