Intel Arc A550M vs NVIDIA P102-100 Comparison

The NVIDIA P102-100 and Intel Arc A550M are two very different graphics processors that end up in a surprisingly close overall contest. The P102-100 is a mining-era Pascal part with a massive FP32 throughput and a huge Vulkan advantage, while the Arc A550M is a modern, power-sipping Xe-HPG mobile chip that edges ahead in OpenCL. The data shows a 1-1 split in benchmark wins, with the average scores differing by roughly 15% in favor of the NVIDIA part. This comparison is about choosing between raw compute density and architectural efficiency.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA P102-100 has an average benchmark score of 58528, which is higher than the Intel Arc A550M's 49737. The P102-100 sits in the 88th percentile of all GPUs, while the Arc A550M sits in the 86th percentile.

Q: How big is the performance gap in the Vulkan test?

A: The NVIDIA P102-100 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 67454, which is 36.1% ahead of the Intel Arc A550M's score of 49580. This is the single largest performance delta in the head-to-head data.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A550M win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the Intel Arc A550M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 49894, narrowly edging out the NVIDIA P102-100's 49602 by a margin of 0.6%.

Q: Which GPU has the higher transistor density?

A: The Intel Arc A550M has a significantly higher transistor density at 53.4M / mm², compared to the NVIDIA P102-100's 25.1M / mm². This is despite the Intel chip having a smaller die size of 406 mm² versus 471 mm².

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The NVIDIA P102-100 has a TDP of 250 W and requires a 600 W power supply with 2x 8-pin connectors. The Intel Arc A550M has a TDP of just 60 W and does not list a suggested PSU or power connectors, as it is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) for mobile devices.

Q: Do either of these GPUs support modern APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 and Vulkan 1.4. However, the Intel Arc A550M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the NVIDIA P102-100 only supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The Intel part also includes 16 dedicated ray tracing cores.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two is stark. The NVIDIA P102-100 is built on the Pascal architecture using a 16 nm process at TSMC, featuring 11,800 million transistors on a 471 mm² die. In contrast, the Intel Arc A550M uses the Xe-HPG architecture (Alchemist generation) on a much more advanced 6 nm process, packing 21,700 million transistors into a smaller 406 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 53.4M / mm² for Intel versus 25.1M / mm² for NVIDIA, showing how much more efficiently Intel packs logic.

The compute configurations tell different stories. The NVIDIA part has 3200 shading units, 200 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, while the Intel part has fewer of each: 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. However, the Intel Arc A550M includes 16 dedicated RT cores, a feature entirely absent from the Pascal-based NVIDIA chip. The NVIDIA card compensates with raw clocks: a base of 1582 MHz and boost of 1683 MHz, versus Intel's 900 MHz base and 2050 MHz boost. The Intel part's higher boost clock helps it close the gap in pixel and texture rates, with 131.2 GPixel/s and 262.4 GTexel/s compared to NVIDIA's 134.6 GPixel/s and 336.6 GTexel/s.

Memory subsystems diverge completely. The NVIDIA P102-100 uses 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 320-bit bus, delivering 440.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc A550M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a much narrower 128-bit bus, resulting in 224.0 GB/s — roughly half the bandwidth. The NVIDIA part's FP32 compute is 10.77 TFLOPS, which is 28% higher than Intel's 8.397 TFLOPS. In FP16, the situation reverses dramatically: the Intel chip delivers 16.79 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the NVIDIA chip is severely gimped at 168.3 GFLOPS with a 1:64 ratio, indicating a heavy bias toward FP32 workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data reveals a clear split based on the API used. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Intel Arc A550M takes the win with a score of 49894, beating the NVIDIA P102-100's 49602 by a narrow 0.6% margin. This is a close result, showing that in a general compute workload, the two architectures perform nearly identically despite their different designs. The Intel chip's higher boost clock and modern architecture likely offset the NVIDIA chip's superior raw FP32 throughput.

The Geekbench Vulkan test is a different story entirely. The NVIDIA P102-100 scores 67454, which is a massive 36.1% higher than the Intel Arc A550M's 49580. This is the dominant performance metric in this comparison, indicating that the Pascal architecture has a substantial advantage in Vulkan-driven tasks. The delta is so large that it completely outweighs the Intel chip's slim OpenCL victory. These results suggest that while the Arc A550M can hold its own in OpenCL compute, it struggles significantly in Vulkan scenarios, possibly due to driver maturity or architectural scheduling differences.

When looking at the overall average benchmark scores, the NVIDIA P102-100's 58528 average is 17.7% higher than the Intel Arc A550M's 49737. This average is heavily influenced by the Vulkan blowout. The nearest rivals for the NVIDIA part include the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT with a delta of 0.2%, showing that the P102-100 is in the same performance class as a high-end desktop gaming card. The Intel Arc A550M's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti with a -0.4% delta, placing it in a much higher-performance tier than its mobile IGP designation might suggest.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for different use cases. If your priority is Vulkan performance or raw FP32 compute, the NVIDIA P102-100 is the superior option by a wide margin. Its 36.1% Vulkan lead and 28% higher FP32 throughput make it the pick for workloads that leverage these APIs. The benchmark average of 58528 versus 49737 reinforces this, with the NVIDIA part sitting in a higher percentile (88th vs 86th).

The Intel Arc A550M is the better choice for power-constrained or mobile environments. Its 60 W TDP is a fraction of the NVIDIA part's 250 W, and its smaller footprint (IGP form factor) allows for portable device integration. The OpenCL win, while small, shows it can match the NVIDIA part in specific compute tasks. For builders who need 8 GB of VRAM versus 5 GB, the Intel chip also offers more memory capacity, even though the bandwidth is lower. The inclusion of 16 RT cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support makes it a more future-proof option for modern gaming features, despite its lower overall compute scores.

Specification Differences

• Process Node: NVIDIA P102-100 is 16 nm; Intel Arc A550M is 6 nm.
• Transistors: NVIDIA has 11,800 million; Intel has 21,700 million.
• Die Size: NVIDIA is 471 mm²; Intel is 406 mm².
• Transistor Density: NVIDIA is 25.1M / mm²; Intel is 53.4M / mm².
• Base Clock: NVIDIA is 1582 MHz; Intel is 900 MHz.
• Boost Clock: NVIDIA is 1683 MHz; Intel is 2050 MHz.
• Memory Size: NVIDIA is 5 GB; Intel is 8 GB.
• Memory Type: NVIDIA is GDDR5X; Intel is GDDR6.
• Memory Bus Width: NVIDIA is 320 bit; Intel is 128 bit.
• Memory Bandwidth: NVIDIA is 440.3 GB/s; Intel is 224.0 GB/s.
• Memory Clock: NVIDIA is 1376 MHz (11 Gbps effective); Intel is 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).
• Shading Units: NVIDIA has 3200; Intel has 2048.
• TMUs: NVIDIA has 200; Intel has 128.
• ROPs: NVIDIA has 80; Intel has 64.
• RT Cores: NVIDIA has none; Intel has 16.
• Pixel Rate: NVIDIA is 134.6 GPixel/s; Intel is 131.2 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: NVIDIA is 336.6 GTexel/s; Intel is 262.4 GTexel/s.
• FP32: NVIDIA is 10.77 TFLOPS; Intel is 8.397 TFLOPS.
• FP16: NVIDIA is 168.3 GFLOPS (1:64); Intel is 16.79 TFLOPS (2:1).
• TDP: NVIDIA is 250 W; Intel is 60 W.
• Slot Width: NVIDIA is Dual-slot; Intel is IGP.
• Power Connectors: NVIDIA is 2x 8-pin; Intel is none.
• Suggested PSU: NVIDIA is 600 W; Intel is not listed.
• Bus Interface: NVIDIA is PCIe 1.0 x4; Intel is PCIe 4.0 x16.
• Display Outputs: NVIDIA has none; Intel is Portable Device Dependent.
• DirectX Support: NVIDIA is 12 (12_1); Intel is 12 Ultimate (12_2).
• Dimensions: NVIDIA is 267 mm (10.5 inches); Intel has no listed dimensions.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA P102-100 wins in scenarios that demand high-bandwidth memory and raw compute throughput. Its 440.3 GB/s bandwidth is nearly double the Intel chip's 224.0 GB/s, which is critical for large data sets and high-resolution textures. The 36.1% Vulkan lead makes it ideal for Vulkan-based rendering engines or compute tasks that use this API. The higher FP32 of 10.77 TFLOPS also favors workloads like scientific simulation or machine learning inference that rely on single-precision math. With a 250 W TDP and a dual-slot design, this is a desktop-oriented card for systems with ample power delivery.

The Intel Arc A550M wins in efficiency and feature completeness. Its 60 W TDP allows for integration into laptops or compact systems where power and heat are primary constraints. The 16 RT cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a feature completely absent on the NVIDIA part. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is 60% larger than the NVIDIA's 5 GB, which helps with larger texture pools in modern games. The OpenCL win, though narrow, shows it can handle general compute tasks competitively. The PCIe 4.0 x16 interface provides much higher host bandwidth than the NVIDIA's PCIe 1.0 x4, which is a significant advantage for data transfer between CPU and GPU. For mobile users or those prioritizing DirectX 12 Ultimate features, the Arc A550M is the clear winner.