Intel Arc A570M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records a single direct comparison between the Intel Arc A570M and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile, using the Geekbench OpenCL test. The Intel part scores 58,239 points, while the NVIDIA part scores 52,998 points. That puts the Intel Arc A570M ahead by 9.9 percent, a decisive margin for any single benchmark.

Looking at the broader context, the Intel Arc A570M sits at the 88th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score is 58,239. The nearest rivals around this score are all desktop-class parts: the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT scores 58,392, which is 0.3 percent higher; the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM scores 58,085, which is 0.3 percent lower; the NVIDIA P102-100 scores 58,528, which is 0.5 percent higher; and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 scores 58,657, which is 0.7 percent higher. The Intel part is effectively in the same performance bracket as these much larger desktop GPUs, which is remarkable for a mobile part with a 75 W TDP.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile, by contrast, lands at the 44th percentile. Its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 8,746, but this figure is pulled down by several older DirectX tests. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 52,998 is the only test that directly matches the Intel part. The nearest rivals for the NVIDIA part are older or lower-tier cards: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 scores 8,743, which is essentially tied; the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 scores 8,686, which is 0.7 percent lower; the AMD Radeon R9 M265X scores 8,851, which is 1.2 percent higher; and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 scores 8,863, which is 1.3 percent higher.

The gap between the two parts in the head-to-head Geekbench OpenCL test is notable. A 9.9 percent lead is not trivial, but it is also not a generational gap. The Intel part's advantage comes from its higher raw compute resources: 2,048 shading units versus 1,792, 128 texture mapping units versus 56, and 64 render output units versus 32. The Intel part also has a higher boost clock in this data? No, the data shows the NVIDIA part boosts to 1,343 MHz while the Intel part boosts to 1,300 MHz, so the Intel advantage is purely from wider execution resources.

The per-test breakdown for the NVIDIA part shows a mixed picture across older APIs. In PassMark DirectX 10, it scores 61; in DirectX 11, it scores 94; in DirectX 12, it scores 55; in DirectX 9, it scores 152; in G2D, it scores 526; in G3D, it scores 11,664; and in GPU compute, it scores 4,419. These scores are all significantly lower than its Geekbench OpenCL result, which suggests the NVIDIA part performs better in compute-heavy workloads than in legacy graphics rasterization. The Intel part has no equivalent PassMark scores in the database, so a direct comparison on those tests is not possible.

The data indicates that in the one benchmark where both parts are measured under identical conditions, the Intel Arc A570M delivers a clear victory. The question is whether that single data point represents the full picture, or whether other workloads would shift the balance.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Arc A570M is the stronger GPU in compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 58,239 versus 52,998 for the NVIDIA part is a 9.9 percent lead. The Intel part also sits at the 88th percentile among all GPUs, while the NVIDIA part sits at the 44th percentile. That percentile gap is larger than the single benchmark delta suggests, because the NVIDIA part's average includes several weak legacy DirectX scores.

For a user prioritizing raw compute throughput, the Intel Arc A570M is the clear choice. Its 5.325 TFLOPS of FP32 performance exceeds the NVIDIA part's 4.813 TFLOPS. Its FP16 performance of 10.65 TFLOPS is more than double the NVIDIA part's 4.813 TFLOPS, which matters for workloads that can use reduced precision. The Intel part also has 16 dedicated ray tracing cores compared to 14 on the NVIDIA part, and while the NVIDIA part has 56 tensor cores, the Intel part has no tensor core equivalent in the database.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile does have advantages in the data, but they are not performance advantages. It consumes 45 W versus 75 W for the Intel part, making it significantly more power-efficient per watt. It is also marked as end-of-life, while the Intel part is active, which suggests longer availability. The NVIDIA part has a higher base clock (1,065 MHz versus 900 MHz) and a higher boost clock (1,343 MHz versus 1,300 MHz), but it cannot overcome the Intel part's wider execution resources.

The database shows the Intel part winning the only head-to-head benchmark, and its percentile placement is far above the NVIDIA part. For any application that relies on OpenCL compute, the Intel Arc A570M is the better choice. The NVIDIA part remains viable for scenarios where power draw is the primary constraint, as its 45 W TDP is substantially lower.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The Intel Arc A570M scores 58,239, which is 9.9 percent higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile's score of 52,998.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in terms of memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Arc A570M has 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile has 192.0 GB/s. Both use GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, but the Intel part has 8 GB of memory versus 4 GB on the NVIDIA part.

Q: What is the power consumption difference between the two parts?

A: The Intel Arc A570M has a TDP of 75 W, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile has a TDP of 45 W. The NVIDIA part consumes 30 W less.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database?

A: The Intel Arc A570M is at the 88th percentile, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile is at the 44th percentile.

Q: Does the NVIDIA part have any advantages in raw clock speeds?

A: Yes, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile has a base clock of 1,065 MHz and a boost clock of 1,343 MHz. The Intel Arc A570M has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 1,300 MHz.

Q: What are the production statuses of the two GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc A570M is marked as Active, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile is marked as End-of-life.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measured specification. The Intel Arc A570M uses 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile uses 1,792 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Intel part has 16 ray tracing cores, while the NVIDIA part has 14. The NVIDIA part has 56 tensor cores, while the Intel part has none listed.

Memory configurations differ substantially. The Intel part has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA part has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel memory clock is 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), while the NVIDIA memory clock is 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).

Compute rates diverge sharply. The Intel part delivers 83.20 GPixel/s pixel rate and 166.4 GTexel/s texture rate. The NVIDIA part delivers 42.98 GPixel/s and 75.21 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 5.325 TFLOPS for Intel versus 4.813 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16 performance is 10.65 TFLOPS (2:1) for Intel versus 4.813 TFLOPS (1:1) for NVIDIA.

Power and interface also differ. The Intel part has a 75 W TDP, while the NVIDIA part has a 45 W TDP. The NVIDIA part lists "None" for power connectors, while the Intel part has no entry. Both use PCIe 4.0 x8. The Intel part has a larger transistor count at 11,500 million versus 12,000 million for NVIDIA, but the Intel die is smaller at 269 mm² versus 276 mm², resulting in similar transistor densities of 42.8M per mm² and 43.5M per mm² respectively.

Release dates differ by five months. The Intel part was released on 2023-07-31, while the NVIDIA part was released on 2023-12-31.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc A570M uses the Xe-HPG architecture on the DG2-256 chip, belonging to the Alchemist generation. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the Ampere architecture on the GA106 chip, belonging to the GeForce 30 Mobile generation. It is fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung.

The process node difference is significant. The Intel part's 6 nm TSMC process is denser and more power-efficient than the 8 nm Samsung process used by the NVIDIA part. Despite this, the Intel part consumes 75 W versus 45 W for the NVIDIA part, indicating that the Intel chip uses its power budget to feed a wider execution engine.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither part has a listed codename or predecessor in the database, except that the NVIDIA part lists "GeForce 20 Mobile" as its predecessor. The NVIDIA part has a successor listed as null, and the Intel part also has null successors.

The transistor counts are close: 11,500 million for Intel versus 12,000 million for NVIDIA. The die sizes are also close: 269 mm² for Intel versus 276 mm² for NVIDIA. The transistor densities are nearly identical at 42.8M per mm² and 43.5M per mm². The architectural difference lies in how those transistors are deployed. Intel uses 2,048 shading units and 128 TMUs, while NVIDIA uses 1,792 shading units and 56 TMUs. NVIDIA instead dedicates resources to 56 tensor cores, which are absent on the Intel part.

The memory subsystem differs in capacity and speed. The Intel part runs its GDDR6 at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective, achieving 224.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA part runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective, achieving 192.0 GB/s. Both use a 128-bit bus, so the Intel part's advantage comes from faster memory clocks.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A570M wins in raw compute throughput. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 9.9 percent higher, and its FP32 and FP16 rates are higher. The FP16 advantage is particularly large: 10.65 TFLOPS versus 4.813 TFLOPS, a 121 percent difference. Any workload that uses FP16 compute, such as certain AI inference or image processing tasks, will favor the Intel part heavily.

The Intel part also wins in texture and pixel fill rates. Its 166.4 GTexel/s is more than double the NVIDIA part's 75.21 GTexel/s, and its 83.20 GPixel/s is nearly double the NVIDIA part's 42.98 GPixel/s. This suggests the Intel part handles traditional rasterization workloads with higher throughput, assuming drivers are optimized.

The Intel part wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. With 8 GB versus 4 GB, it can hold larger working sets in VRAM, which matters for modern games and creative applications. Its 224.0 GB/s bandwidth is 16.7 percent higher than the NVIDIA part's 192.0 GB/s.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile wins on power efficiency. Its 45 W TDP is 40 percent lower than the Intel part's 75 W TDP. For thin-and-light laptops where thermal and battery constraints are paramount, the NVIDIA part is the more practical choice despite lower performance.

The NVIDIA part also wins on legacy DirectX performance, based on its PassMark scores, though there is no direct Intel comparison in the database. Its PassMark G3D score of 11,664 and DirectX 9 score of 152 indicate it retains functionality in older APIs, which can matter for legacy applications.

The NVIDIA part has tensor cores, which the Intel part lacks. While no benchmark in the database directly tests tensor core performance, the presence of 56 tensor cores suggests the NVIDIA part has dedicated hardware for AI workloads that the Intel part cannot match without software emulation.

Production status favors the Intel part. The Intel Arc A570M is Active, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile is End-of-life. For long-term availability and driver support, the Intel part has the advantage.

The single head-to-head benchmark result, combined with the percentile gap, indicates the Intel Arc A570M is the stronger GPU in compute performance. The NVIDIA part's only decisive advantage is its lower power draw, which makes it suitable for power-constrained designs where the 30 W difference is critical.