Intel Arc A550M vs NVIDIA Quadro P6000 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P6000 has an average benchmark score of 69986, while the Intel Arc A550M has an average benchmark score of 49737. The Quadro P6000 sits at the 90th percentile among all GPUs, and the Arc A550M sits at the 86th percentile.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in OpenCL performance?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 scores 66382, and the Intel Arc A550M scores 49894. The Quadro P6000 wins by 33%.

Q: What about Vulkan performance?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 scores 73590, and the Intel Arc A550M scores 49580. The Quadro P6000 wins by 48.4%.

Q: Which GPU has more memory, and what type is it?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P6000 has 24 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 384-bit bus with 432.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc A550M has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the process nodes for each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P6000 uses a 16 nm process at TSMC with 11,800 million transistors on a 471 mm² die. The Intel Arc A550M uses a 6 nm process at TSMC with 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die.

Q: Do either of these GPUs have ray tracing cores?

A: The Intel Arc A550M has 16 ray tracing cores, while the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 has no ray tracing cores listed. The Quadro P6000 also has no tensor cores, and the Arc A550M has no tensor cores either.

The Verdict

The data points strongly toward the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 for raw compute performance. It wins both recorded head-to-head benchmark tests, and its average benchmark score of 69986 is about 40.7% higher than the Intel Arc A550M's 49737. The Quadro P6000 also claims a higher percentile rank at 90 compared to the Arc A550M's 86. For workloads that depend on OpenCL or Vulkan throughput, the Quadro P6000 is the clear choice.

The Intel Arc A550M, however, is a mobile part with a 60 W TDP and IGP slot width, whereas the Quadro P6000 is a dual-slot desktop card with a 250 W TDP. The Arc A550M also carries 16 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Quadro P6000 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). Users who need ray tracing capability or a low-power mobile solution should consider the Arc A550M. Users who need maximum compute performance, more memory, and higher bandwidth should select the Quadro P6000.

The Quadro P6000 is an end-of-life product from the Pascal generation, launched in 2016 with a launch MSRP of 5,999 USD. The Intel Arc A550M is also end-of-life, but it belongs to the Alchemist (Arc 5 Mobile) generation. Neither product has a successor listed in the database for the Arc A550M, while the Quadro P6000 lists Quadro Volta as its successor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data records two tests, and the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 wins both. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro P6000 scores 66382 against the Arc A550M's 49894, a 33% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Quadro P6000 scores 73590 against the Arc A550M's 49580, a 48.4% advantage. The Vulkan gap is notably larger than the OpenCL gap, suggesting the Quadro P6000's advantage grows in Vulkan workloads.

The average benchmark score tells a similar story. The Quadro P6000 averages 69986, while the Arc A550M averages 49737. That difference places the Quadro P6000 about 40.7% ahead. The Quadro P6000's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 at 69870 (0.2% behind), the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile at 70140 (0.2% ahead), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE at 70829 (1.2% ahead). The Arc A550M's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti at 49957 (0.4% ahead), the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 at 50001 (0.5% ahead), and the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT at 48477 (2.6% behind). The Quadro P6000 competes in a higher performance tier, while the Arc A550M sits in a lower tier despite its modern architecture.

Specification Differences

The NVIDIA Quadro P6000 and Intel Arc A550M differ across nearly every key specification. The Quadro P6000 uses the GP102 chip with Pascal architecture, while the Arc A550M uses the DG2-512 chip with Xe-HPG architecture. The process nodes differ significantly: 16 nm for the Quadro P6000 versus 6 nm for the Arc A550M. Both are fabricated by TSMC.

Memory configurations are far apart. The Quadro P6000 offers 24 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus with 432.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc A550M offers 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro P6000 has triple the memory capacity and nearly double the bandwidth.

Compute resources also differ. The Quadro P6000 has 3840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The Arc A550M has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The Quadro P6000's pixel rate is 157.9 GPixel/s versus 131.2 GPixel/s for the Arc A550M. The texture rate is 394.8 GTexel/s versus 262.4 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The Quadro P6000 has a 1506 MHz base clock and 1645 MHz boost clock. The Arc A550M has a 900 MHz base clock and 2050 MHz boost clock. The Arc A550M boosts much higher, but the Quadro P6000 still wins in raw throughput due to its larger shader count.

Power and physical configuration differ sharply. The Quadro P6000 has a 250 W TDP, dual-slot width, and a 1x 8-pin power connector with a 600 W suggested PSU. The Arc A550M has a 60 W TDP, IGP slot width, no power connector listed, and no suggested PSU listed. The Quadro P6000 measures 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, while the Arc A550M has no listed dimensions.

Bus interfaces differ as well. The Quadro P6000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, and the Arc A550M uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs also differ: the Quadro P6000 has 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Arc A550M lists "Portable Device Dependent" outputs.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Quadro P6000 is built on the Pascal architecture, specifically the GP102 chip, and belongs to the Quadro Pascal (Px000) generation. The Intel Arc A550M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-512 chip, and belongs to the Alchemist (Arc 5 Mobile) generation. These architectures target different eras and use cases.

Transistor counts and densities reveal the architectural shift. The Quadro P6000 has 11,800 million transistors on a 471 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 25.1M per mm². The Arc A550M has 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 53.4M per mm². The Arc A550M packs nearly twice as many transistors into a smaller die.

FP16 performance shows a dramatic architectural difference. The Quadro P6000 delivers 197.4 GFLOPS FP16 at a 1:64 ratio, meaning its FP16 throughput is far lower than its FP32 throughput. The Arc A550M delivers 16.79 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 throughput is double its FP32 throughput. The Arc A550M is clearly designed for workloads that use FP16, while the Quadro P6000 is not.

Ray tracing support is exclusive to the Arc A550M, which has 16 ray tracing cores. The Quadro P6000 has no ray tracing cores listed. DirectX support also differs: the Quadro P6000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the Arc A550M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

The memory clock speeds reflect the different memory generations. The Quadro P6000 runs its GDDR5X at 1127 MHz with 9 Gbps effective speed. The Arc A550M runs its GDDR6 at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed. The Arc A550M's memory is faster per pin, but the Quadro P6000's wider bus compensates with higher total bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro P6000 wins in raw compute benchmarks. It takes both head-to-head tests, with a 33% lead in OpenCL and a 48.4% lead in Vulkan. Its average benchmark score of 69986 places it at the 90th percentile, and it outperforms its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200, by 0.2%. The Quadro P6000's 24 GB memory capacity and 432.8 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for memory-heavy workloads such as large dataset processing or high-resolution rendering. Its 3840 shading units and 240 TMUs give it substantial pixel and texture throughput at 157.9 GPixel/s and 394.8 GTexel/s respectively. The Quadro P6000's FP32 performance of 12.63 TFLOPS is also well ahead of the Arc A550M's 8.397 TFLOPS, a 50.4% advantage in single-precision compute.

The Intel Arc A550M wins in modern feature support and power efficiency. Its 60 W TDP is far lower than the Quadro P6000's 250 W, making it suitable for portable devices. Its IGP slot width and lack of external power connectors reflect its mobile design. The Arc A550M's 16 ray tracing cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing, which the Quadro P6000 cannot do. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) is a generation ahead of the Quadro P6000's DirectX 12 (12_1). The Arc A550M also delivers 16.79 TFLOPS FP16, which is 84 times the Quadro P6000's FP16 throughput of 197.4 GFLOPS, making it far more capable for FP16-optimized workloads. Its 6 nm process and 53.4M per mm² transistor density show a modern design that packs 21,700 million transistors into a 406 mm² die.

For professionals who prioritize compute throughput, memory capacity, and proven driver maturity, the Quadro P6000 is the stronger pick. For users who need ray tracing, FP16 performance, low power consumption, or a mobile form factor, the Arc A550M is the better fit. The head-to-head benchmark results are decisive in favor of the Quadro P6000, but the Arc A550M's feature set addresses workloads that the older Pascal architecture simply cannot handle.