Intel Arc A570M vs NVIDIA CMP 40HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is decisive. The NVIDIA CMP 40HX scores 93,395, while the Intel Arc A570M scores 58,239. That is a 60.4% advantage for the NVIDIA card. This is not a marginal win; it is a dominant margin that places the two products in different performance tiers despite both carrying 8 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Looking at the broader database context, the NVIDIA CMP 40HX sits at the 93rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 85,637. The Intel Arc A570M sits at the 88th percentile, with an average score of 58,239. The gap between their percentiles, five points, understates the raw performance difference because the percentile scale compresses at the top end. In raw terms, the NVIDIA card delivers roughly 47% more average benchmark performance.

The nearest rivals for the NVIDIA CMP 40HX show that it is tightly clustered with professional workstation cards. It trails the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 by only 1.7% and the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 by 2.1% in average score. It leads the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 by 4.4% and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X by 5.8%. For the Intel Arc A570M, the nearest rivals tell a different story: it is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT (0.3% behind), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM (0.3% ahead), the NVIDIA P102-100 (0.5% behind), and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (0.7% behind). The Intel card sits in a much more crowded and competitive performance band, whereas the NVIDIA card edges out its closest competitors by small but consistent margins.

The single head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, records a 60.4% delta in favor of the NVIDIA CMP 40HX. No reverse win exists; the Intel Arc A570M does not outperform the NVIDIA card in any recorded test. The data shows a clean sweep, with one win for NVIDIA and zero for Intel.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The NVIDIA CMP 40HX uses the TU106 chip built on Turing architecture, manufactured on a 12 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc A570M uses the DG2-256 chip built on Xe-HPG architecture, manufactured on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. The process node difference is substantial: 12 nm versus 6 nm means Intel packs transistors much more densely. The NVIDIA chip has 10,800 million transistors on a 445 mm² die, yielding a density of 24.3 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel chip has 11,500 million transistors on a 269 mm² die, yielding 42.8 million per square millimeter. Intel achieves nearly 80% higher transistor density on a smaller die, while NVIDIA uses a larger die with more area per transistor.

The compute configurations differ in scale and composition. The NVIDIA CMP 40HX has 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. It also includes 36 ray tracing cores and 288 tensor cores. The Intel Arc A570M has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 16 ray tracing cores. Intel does not list tensor core equivalents in the database. The NVIDIA card has more shading units, more TMUs, more ray tracing cores, and dedicated tensor cores that Intel lacks.

Clock speeds show a notable divergence. The NVIDIA card runs at a base clock of 1470 MHz and boosts to 1650 MHz. The Intel card runs at 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost. Even with the Intel card's lower clocks, the architecture extracts competitive results in its own tier, but the raw clock advantage belongs to NVIDIA. Memory clocks are identical at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective, but the memory subsystem differs significantly. Both cards have 8 GB of GDDR6, but the NVIDIA card uses a 256-bit bus delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel card uses a 128-bit bus delivering 224.0 GB/s. That is exactly half the memory bandwidth.

The resulting throughput figures reflect these architectural choices. The NVIDIA CMP 40HX achieves 105.6 GPixel/s pixel rate and 237.6 GTexel/s texture rate, with 7.603 TFLOPS FP32 and 15.21 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The Intel Arc A570M achieves 83.20 GPixel/s and 166.4 GTexel/s, with 5.325 TFLOPS FP32 and 10.65 TFLOPS FP16. The NVIDIA card is ahead in every throughput metric, with the FP32 gap being roughly 43%.

Power and physical design also separate the two. The NVIDIA CMP 40HX has a 185 W TDP, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and a 450 W suggested PSU. It is a dual-slot card measuring 229 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 35 mm wide. The Intel Arc A570M has a 75 W TDP, requires no power connectors, and lists no suggested PSU. It is designated as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with dimensions not recorded in the database. The NVIDIA card has no display outputs, reflecting its mining-focused design, while the Intel card's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," indicating a mobile-oriented part.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA CMP 40HX wins in every measured benchmark category. In OpenCL, it holds a 60.4% advantage. In raw compute throughput, it leads in pixel rate (105.6 vs 83.20 GPixel/s), texture rate (237.6 vs 166.4 GTexel/s), FP32 (7.603 vs 5.325 TFLOPS), and FP16 (15.21 vs 10.65 TFLOPS). It also has more shading units, more TMUs, more ray tracing cores, and the only tensor cores in this matchup. The memory bandwidth advantage is stark: 448.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s, which directly benefits bandwidth-hungry workloads.

The Intel Arc A570M wins in power efficiency and physical integration. Its 75 W TDP is less than half of the NVIDIA card's 185 W TDP. It requires no external power connector, making it suitable for systems without dedicated GPU power delivery. It is built on a newer 6 nm process with higher transistor density, which suggests better power-per-transistor characteristics, though the database does not provide direct efficiency benchmarks. The Intel card is also an active product, while the NVIDIA card is end-of-life. The Intel card's portable-device-dependent outputs indicate it is designed for mobile integration, whereas the NVIDIA card has no display outputs at all.

For workloads that depend on raw compute and memory bandwidth, the NVIDIA CMP 40HX is the clear choice. For systems constrained by power budget or physical space, or for mobile platforms where the GPU must share power with a CPU, the Intel Arc A570M offers a viable alternative despite lower absolute performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 40HX scores 93,395 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 60.4% higher than the Intel Arc A570M's score of 58,239.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same memory configuration?

A: Both have 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, but the NVIDIA CMP 40HX uses a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel Arc A570M uses a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 40HX has a 185 W TDP and requires a 450 W suggested PSU with one 8-pin connector. The Intel Arc A570M has a 75 W TDP and requires no power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 40HX has 36 ray tracing cores, while the Intel Arc A570M has 16 ray tracing cores.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 40HX is end-of-life, while the Intel Arc A570M is listed as active production.

Q: How does each GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 40HX is within 2.1% of the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 and NVIDIA Quadro GP100, and leads the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 by 4.4%. The Intel Arc A570M is within 0.7% of the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT, AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM, NVIDIA P102-100, and AMD Radeon PRO V710.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the NVIDIA CMP 40HX is the substantially faster GPU in this comparison. Its 60.4% OpenCL lead, combined with higher throughput in every recorded metric, makes it the performance winner without qualification. The 93rd percentile placement versus 88th for Intel reinforces this. The NVIDIA card also benefits from more shading units (2,304 vs 2,048), more TMUs (144 vs 128), more ray tracing cores (36 vs 16), and the presence of 288 tensor cores that Intel does not offer.

However, the Intel Arc A570M is not without rationale for specific users. Its 75 W TDP versus 185 W means it can operate in systems where the NVIDIA card would require substantial power delivery. Its lack of power connectors and IGP designation make it suitable for mobile or compact platforms. The newer 6 nm process and higher transistor density (42.8M per mm² vs 24.3M per mm²) indicate a more modern manufacturing approach, even if the performance does not match.

The NVIDIA CMP 40HX should be chosen by users who prioritize raw compute performance, memory bandwidth, and API feature completeness. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, identical to the Intel card, but with higher throughput in every category. The Intel Arc A570M should be chosen by users with strict power limits or space constraints, where its 75 W envelope and connector-free design are decisive advantages. The database records no scenario where Intel wins a benchmark, so the choice comes down to performance versus efficiency.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA CMP 40HX | Intel Arc A570M |

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

| Architecture | Turing | Xe-HPG |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 10,800 million | 11,500 million |

| Die Size | 445 mm² | 269 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.3M / mm² | 42.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1470 MHz | 900 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1650 MHz | 1300 MHz |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 448.0 GB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2304 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 144 | 128 |

| ROPs | 64 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 36 | 16 |

| Tensor Cores | 288 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 105.6 GPixel/s | 83.20 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 237.6 GTexel/s | 166.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.603 TFLOPS | 5.325 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 15.21 TFLOPS (2:1) | 10.65 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 185 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | null |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | null |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 1.0 x4 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2021-02-24 | 2023-07-31 |

| Launch MSRP | 699 USD | null |

| OpenCL Score | 93395 | 58239 |

| Vulkan Score | 77879 | null |

| Percentile | 93 | 88 |

| Average Score | 85637 | 58239 |