Intel Arc A530M vs NVIDIA P102-100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data splits these two GPUs almost perfectly down the middle. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Intel Arc A530M edges out the NVIDIA P102-100 by a hair. The Arc scores 49,735 against the P102-100's 49,602, a margin of just 0.3 percent. For all practical purposes, that is a statistical tie in raw compute throughput. Anyone expecting a generational gap to show up in this workload will be disappointed; both cards land within noise of each other.

The Vulkan test tells a completely different story. Here, the NVIDIA P102-100 absolutely demolishes the Intel part. The P102-100 posts 67,454, while the Arc A530M manages only 43,492. That is a 55.1 percent advantage for the NVIDIA card. This is not a close contest, it is a landslide. Vulkan tends to reward raw geometry throughput and driver efficiency, and the data suggests the Pascal architecture, despite its age, still has serious legs in this API.

Looking at the broader benchmark averages, the P102-100 holds a clear overall lead. Its average benchmark score is 58,528, while the Arc A530M sits at 46,614. That gap of roughly 25 percent across all recorded tests reflects the Vulkan result more than the OpenCL result. The P102-100 also carries a higher percentile ranking, sitting in the 88th percentile of all GPUs in the database, versus the Arc's 85th percentile.

The nearest rival data reinforces these positions. The P102-100 sits within 0.2 percent of the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT and within 0.5 percent of the Intel Arc A570M. It is effectively trading blows with much newer silicon. The Arc A530M, meanwhile, matches the AMD Radeon RX 5600M exactly at 0 percent delta, and sits 1.2 percent ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A2000. The Intel part is competitive in its own tier, but that tier is noticeably below where the P102-100 operates.

One important nuance: the P102-100's wins come from a single API. If a workload relies on Vulkan, this GPU is the clear choice. If a workload uses OpenCL, the two are interchangeable. The database shows exactly one win for each card in the head-to-head tests, so the final call depends entirely on which API the target application uses.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: choose the NVIDIA P102-100 if your software leverages Vulkan, choose the Intel Arc A530M if you need OpenCL performance and modern platform features. The P102-100 wins the overall average by 25 percent, so for general compute it is the stronger card. But the Arc A530M matches it in OpenCL, which means that specific workload does not favor either GPU.

For a system builder targeting maximum raw throughput, the P102-100's 55 percent Vulkan lead is decisive. It also sits higher in the database percentile ranking (88th versus 85th), and its nearest rivals include the Radeon RX 6950 XT, a card that was a flagship in its generation. The P102-100 is punching well above its mining-oriented origins.

The Arc A530M makes sense for a different use case. Its 65 W power draw, combined with an integrated form factor (IGP slot width) and portable-device-dependent display outputs, points to laptop or compact system integration. It has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, which is 3 GB more than the P102-100's 5 GB. For workloads that need more memory capacity rather than sheer bandwidth, the Arc has an argument. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, while the P102-100 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). If ray tracing or mesh shaders matter, the Intel part is the only option here.

The production status also matters. The P102-100 is end-of-life, released in early 2018. The Arc A530M is active, released in mid-2023. For long-term availability and driver support, the Intel part is the safer bet. But for immediate compute performance, the older NVIDIA card wins.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The NVIDIA P102-100 uses the GP102 chip on the Pascal architecture, built on a 16 nm process at TSMC. It packs 11,800 million transistors onto a 471 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.1 million per square millimeter. The Intel Arc A530M uses the DG2-256 chip on the Xe-HPG architecture (Alchemist generation), built on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 11,500 million transistors on a much smaller 269 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 42.8 million per square millimeter. The Intel chip is nearly twice as dense, which explains how it fits comparable transistor counts into roughly half the silicon area.

The compute resources differ sharply. The P102-100 has 3,200 shading units, 200 texture mapping units, and 80 raster output units. The Arc A530M has 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. On paper, the NVIDIA card has more than double the raw shading hardware. That shows up in the pixel rate (134.6 GPixel/s versus 62.40 GPixel/s) and texture rate (336.6 GTexel/s versus 124.8 GTexel/s). The Arc does add 12 ray tracing cores, which the Pascal chip lacks entirely.

Clock speeds also diverge. The P102-100 runs at a 1582 MHz base and 1683 MHz boost. The Arc A530M runs much lower at 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost. Despite the lower clocks, the Arc achieves a much better FP16 ratio: 7.987 TFLOPS at a 2:1 rate, versus the P102-100's 168.3 GFLOPS at a 1:64 rate. For FP32, the P102-100 dominates with 10.77 TFLOPS versus 3.994 TFLOPS.

Memory subsystems are equally different. The P102-100 uses 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 320-bit bus, delivering 440.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The Arc A530M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card has nearly double the bandwidth but less capacity. The Arc's memory clocks at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), while the P102-100's memory runs at 1376 MHz (11 Gbps effective).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Vulkan benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA P102-100 scores 67,454 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 55.1 percent higher than the Intel Arc A530M's 43,492. This is the largest performance gap in any recorded test.

Q: Do the two GPUs perform the same in OpenCL?

A: Nearly identical. The Intel Arc A530M scores 49,735 and the NVIDIA P102-100 scores 49,602, a difference of only 0.3 percent. This is effectively a tie.

Q: Which GPU has more memory?

A: The Intel Arc A530M has 8 GB of GDDR6, while the NVIDIA P102-100 has 5 GB of GDDR5X. The Arc offers 3 GB more capacity, but the P102-100 has much higher bandwidth at 440.3 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s.

Q: Does either GPU support ray tracing?

A: Only the Intel Arc A530M has ray tracing cores (12 total). The NVIDIA P102-100 has no RT cores, and its DirectX support is limited to version 12 (12_1), while the Arc supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The Intel Arc A530M is rated at 65 W TDP, while the NVIDIA P102-100 is rated at 250 W. The Arc also uses an integrated form factor (IGP) with no power connectors, while the P102-100 requires dual-slot cooling and two 8-pin power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has a higher overall benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA P102-100 has an average benchmark score of 58,528, compared to the Intel Arc A530M's 46,614. The P102-100 also ranks in the 88th percentile of all GPUs, versus the Arc's 85th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA P102-100 wins decisively in Vulkan-based workloads. The 55.1 percent lead in Geekbench Vulkan is the single biggest differentiator in this comparison. It also wins on raw memory bandwidth (440.3 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s), pixel fill rate (134.6 GPixel/s versus 62.40 GPixel/s), and texture fill rate (336.6 GTexel/s versus 124.8 GTexel/s). For any application that pushes geometry or relies on Vulkan's low-level API access, the Pascal card is the clear pick. Its higher FP32 throughput (10.77 TFLOPS versus 3.994 TFLOPS) also makes it better suited for general compute tasks that do not use FP16 heavily.

The Intel Arc A530M wins on efficiency and modern features. Its 65 W power draw is a fraction of the P102-100's 250 W, making it viable for compact or mobile systems. It has more memory capacity (8 GB versus 5 GB), which helps with large datasets or texture-heavy workloads that exceed the P102-100's frame buffer. The Arc also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, including ray tracing, which the Pascal card cannot do. Its FP16 performance (7.987 TFLOPS versus 168.3 GFLOPS) is dramatically better, making it the choice for workloads that leverage half-precision math. The Arc's smaller die (269 mm² versus 471 mm²) and higher transistor density (42.8M per mm² versus 25.1M per mm²) also point to a more modern, integrated design.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every major specification category. The NVIDIA P102-100 uses a 16 nm process, while the Intel Arc A530M uses a 6 nm process. The P102-100 has a die size of 471 mm², the Arc is 269 mm². Transistor counts are close (11,800 million versus 11,500 million), but density favors Intel at 42.8M per mm² versus 25.1M per mm².

Clock speeds favor NVIDIA: 1582 MHz base and 1683 MHz boost, versus 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost. Memory configuration differs completely: 5 GB GDDR5X on a 320-bit bus for the P102-100, versus 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus for the Arc. Bandwidth favors NVIDIA at 440.3 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s.

Compute units are heavily skewed toward NVIDIA: 3,200 shading units, 200 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, versus 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The Arc adds 12 RT cores; the P102-100 has none. Pixel rate (134.6 versus 62.40 GPixel/s) and texture rate (336.6 versus 124.8 GTexel/s) both favor NVIDIA, as does FP32 (10.77 versus 3.994 TFLOPS). FP16 flips to Intel (7.987 versus 168.3 GFLOPS).

Power and form factor differ sharply. The P102-100 draws 250 W, requires dual-slot cooling, two 8-pin connectors, and a 600 W suggested PSU. The Arc draws 65 W, uses an IGP form factor, has no power connectors, and needs no suggested PSU. Bus interfaces also differ: PCIe 1.0 x4 for the P102-100, PCIe 4.0 x8 for the Arc. Display outputs are absent on the P102-100 but portable-device-dependent on the Arc. Finally, the P102-100 is end-of-life with a 2018 release date, while the Arc is active with a 2023 release date.