Intel Arc A550M vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Comparison

Intel Arc A550M and NVIDIA RTX A2000 are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions, but they occupy different design philosophies. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy in the available head-to-head benchmarks, with the RTX A2000 winning both compute tests decisively. However, the Arc A550M counters with a more modern process node, higher clock speeds, and a different architectural approach that yields competitive aggregate scores despite losing the direct comparisons.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are limited to two Geekbench compute tests, and NVIDIA dominates both. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A2000 scores 67,695 against the Arc A550M’s 49,894, a margin of 26.3% in NVIDIA’s favor. The Vulkan test tells a similar story: the RTX A2000 posts 69,089 while the Arc A550M manages 49,580, representing a 28.2% deficit for Intel. These are substantial gaps, not marginal differences, indicating that NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture holds a significant lead in raw compute throughput as measured by these workloads.

The RTX A2000’s advantage is amplified by its higher shading unit count—3,328 versus 2,048—and its dedicated tensor cores, which number 104. The Arc A550M has no tensor core equivalent in the FACT PACK, and its 16 ray tracing cores are fewer than the RTX A2000’s 26. In terms of raw FP32 throughput, the RTX A2000 delivers 7.987 TFLOPS, which is only slightly below the Arc A550M’s 8.397 TFLOPS, yet the benchmark scores show NVIDIA pulling far ahead. This suggests that the RTX A2000 extracts more real-world compute performance from its architecture, likely due to better driver optimization or more efficient execution of Geekbench’s specific workloads.

The Arc A550M’s average benchmark score across all tests is 49,737, placing it in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. The RTX A2000, with an average of 46,043, sits in the 85th percentile. This is a curious inversion: the RTX A2000 wins the two shared tests but has a lower overall average, meaning its other benchmark results (such as the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,345) pull its average down. The Arc A550M’s nearest rival by average score is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti, which sits just 0.4% ahead at 49,957. For the RTX A2000, its closest competitor is the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation, a mere 0.2% higher at 45,972. These peer comparisons highlight that the Arc A550M is positioned near high-end consumer GPUs, while the RTX A2000 aligns with workstation-class parts, despite losing the direct head-to-head.

Architecture Differences

The Arc A550M is built on Intel’s Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-512 chip, fabricated on a 6 nm TSMC process. This node packs 21,700 million transistors into a 406 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 53.4 million per square millimeter. The RTX A2000 uses NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture with the GA106 chip, manufactured on Samsung’s 8 nm process. It contains 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die, with a density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. Intel’s process advantage is clear: a smaller node, higher density, and nearly double the transistor count.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The Arc A550M runs at a base of 900 MHz and boosts to 2,050 MHz, while the RTX A2000 is far more conservative at 562 MHz base and 1,200 MHz boost. The Intel part’s higher clocks help it reach 8.397 TFLOPS FP32 performance, slightly edging out the RTX A2000’s 7.987 TFLOPS. However, the RTX A2000 compensates with 3,328 shading units versus 2,048, and 104 tensor cores—a feature entirely absent from the Arc A550M’s spec sheet. The RTX A2000 also has more ray tracing cores (26 versus 16), but the Intel part has more TMUs (128 versus 104) and ROPs (64 versus 48).

Memory configurations diverge as well. The Arc A550M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A2000 has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a wider 192-bit bus, achieving 288.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card’s memory runs at 12 Gbps effective, while Intel’s is faster at 14 Gbps, but the wider bus wins out on total bandwidth. The RTX A2000’s pixel rate is 57.60 GPixel/s and texture rate is 124.8 GTexel/s, both lower than the Arc A550M’s 131.2 GPixel/s and 262.4 GTexel/s, reflecting the Intel part’s higher clock-driven fill rates.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 wins both shared tests. It beats the Arc A550M by 26.3% in Geekbench OpenCL (67,695 vs 49,894) and by 28.2% in Geekbench Vulkan (69,089 vs 49,580).

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Arc A550M has a higher average score of 49,737 across all benchmarks, placing it in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. The RTX A2000 averages 46,043, landing in the 85th percentile.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RTX A2000 has 3,328 shading units, significantly more than the Arc A550M’s 2,048. Despite this, the Arc A550M achieves slightly higher FP32 throughput at 8.397 TFLOPS versus 7.987 TFLOPS.

Q: Is there a difference in memory bandwidth?

A: Yes. The RTX A2000 offers 288.0 GB/s bandwidth via a 192-bit bus, while the Arc A550M provides 224.0 GB/s on a 128-bit bus. The RTX A2000 also has less memory (6 GB vs 8 GB).

Q: What are their process nodes and transistor counts?

A: The Arc A550M uses TSMC’s 6 nm process with 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die. The RTX A2000 uses Samsung’s 8 nm process with 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: Only the RTX A2000 has tensor cores, with 104 of them. The Arc A550M has no tensor cores listed in its specifications.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc A550M | NVIDIA RTX A2000 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | DG2-512 | GA106 |

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Ampere |

| Process Node | 6 nm (TSMC) | 8 nm (Samsung) |

| Transistors | 21,700 million | 12,000 million |

| Die Size | 406 mm² | 276 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 53.4M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 900 MHz | 562 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2050 MHz | 1200 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 6 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 3328 |

| TMUs | 128 | 104 |

| ROPs | 64 | 48 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 16 | 26 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 104 |

| Pixel Rate | 131.2 GPixel/s | 57.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 262.4 GTexel/s | 124.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 8.397 TFLOPS | 7.987 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 16.79 TFLOPS (2:1) | 7.987 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 60 W | 70 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | None | 250 W |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Dimensions | N/A | 167 mm (6.6 inches) length, 69 mm (2.7 inches) height |

| Release Date | N/A | 2021-08-09 |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | 449 USD |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: the RTX A2000 is the faster GPU in compute benchmarks, winning both head-to-head tests by substantial margins of 26.3% and 28.2%. Its higher shading unit count and tensor cores make it a more capable compute engine in these specific workloads. The Arc A550M, however, holds a higher average benchmark score (49,737 vs 46,043) and a slightly better percentile ranking (86th vs 85th), driven by its superior fill rates and higher clock speeds.

For users prioritizing raw compute performance in Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, the RTX A2000 is the logical choice. Its 6 GB memory and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, paired with 104 tensor cores, suggest stronger performance in GPU-accelerated workflows that leverage these features. The Arc A550M, with its 8 GB memory and 60 W TDP, offers more memory capacity and lower power draw, which could benefit sustained workloads or systems with strict power limits. The RTX A2000’s 70 W TDP and dual-slot design, along with its 250 W suggested PSU, indicate a more demanding installation profile.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA RTX A2000 wins on compute benchmarks. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 67,695 and Vulkan score of 69,089 both top the Arc A550M by over 26%. Its 3,328 shading units and 104 tensor cores provide the hardware foundation for this advantage. The RTX A2000 also offers more memory bandwidth (288.0 GB/s) and a wider 192-bit bus, which benefits memory-intensive tasks. With 26 ray tracing cores and a workstation-oriented feature set (4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs), it suits professional environments that rely on NVIDIA’s ecosystem.

Intel Arc A550M wins on raw throughput metrics. Despite losing the benchmarks, the Arc A550M posts higher pixel rate (131.2 GPixel/s vs 57.60 GPixel/s) and texture rate (262.4 GTexel/s vs 124.8 GTexel/s), thanks to its 2,050 MHz boost clock. Its FP32 performance is slightly higher at 8.397 TFLOPS, and its FP16 output of 16.79 TFLOPS is more than double the RTX A2000’s 7.987 TFLOPS. With 8 GB of memory and a lower 60 W TDP, the Arc A550M is positioned for efficiency and capacity, making it a candidate for systems where power draw and memory size matter more than compute benchmark scores. Its 21,700 million transistors on a 6 nm node also indicate a more modern design, which may offer better long-term driver maturity as Intel’s software stack evolves. The Arc A550M’s nearest rival, the RTX 5070 Ti, sits just 0.4% away in average score, showing its aggregate performance is competitive with higher-tier consumer parts, even if the two shared tests favor NVIDIA.