Intel Arc A570M vs NVIDIA RTX A4500 Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A4500 and the Intel Arc A570M occupy entirely different corners of the GPU landscape, and the recorded data makes that gap unmistakable. The A4500 is an end-of-life Ampere workstation card sitting in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the Arc A570M is an active Alchemist mobile part in the 88th percentile. On the one benchmark where their results directly overlap, Geekbench OpenCL, the A4500 posts 141837 against the A570M's 58239, a 143.5 percent advantage. That single number frames everything that follows: this is not a close contest, but a comparison between a full-size professional board and a power-frugal integrated-class mobile solution.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster overall?

A: The RTX A4500. Its average benchmark score in the database is 91671 versus 58239 for the Arc A570M, and in the head-to-head Geekbench OpenCL test it leads by 143.5 percent.

Q: How do the two compare on raw compute throughput?

A: The A4500 delivers 23.65 TFLOPS of FP32 against 5.325 TFLOPS for the A570M. For FP16 the split differs in character too: the A4500 runs FP16 at 1:1 with FP32 (23.65 TFLOPS), while the A570M runs FP16 at 2:1, reaching 10.65 TFLOPS.

Q: What memory does each GPU have?

A: The A4500 carries 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus with 640.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The A570M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. The RTX A4500 is listed as end-of-life, having launched on 2021-11-22. The Arc A570M is active, released 2023-07-31.

Q: Which GPUs are their closest rivals in the database?

A: The A4500's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (average score 91134, within 0.6 percent) and the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 (87108, 5.2 percent behind). The A570M clusters around the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT (58392, 0.3 percent ahead) and the NVIDIA P102-100 (58528, 0.5 percent ahead).

Q: What are their power profiles?

A: The A4500 is a 200 W dual-slot card fed by a single 8-pin connector, with a suggested 550 W system PSU. The A570M is a 75 W IGP-class part with no auxiliary power connector.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf starts at the silicon level. The RTX A4500 uses the GA102 chip on the Ampere architecture, built by Samsung on an 8 nm process. It packs 28,300 million transistors onto a 628 mm² die, yielding a density of 45.1M transistors per mm². The Arc A570M uses the DG2-256 chip on Intel's Xe-HPG architecture, fabbed by TSMC on a 6 nm process. Its die is far smaller at 269 mm² with 11,500 million transistors and a density of 42.8M per mm².

The A4500's silicon budget translates directly into a much larger resource pool: 7168 shading units, 224 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 56 RT cores, and 224 tensor cores. The A570M fields 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 16 RT cores, with no tensor cores listed in the database. Clocks tell a similar story: the A4500 boosts to 1650 MHz from a 1050 MHz base, while the A570M boosts to 1300 MHz from 900 MHz. Memory clocks run at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) on the A4500 versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) on the A570M.

Feature support, interestingly, is where the two converge. Both report DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical in the recorded data. The A4500 connects over PCIe 4.0 x16 with four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs; the A570M uses PCIe 4.0 x8 and lists its display outputs as portable-device dependent, as expected for a mobile part. The A4500 traces its lineage from Quadro Turing toward Workstation Ada successors; the A570M belongs to the Arc 5 Mobile generation and lists no predecessor or successor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only one test appears in both records: Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA RTX A4500 scores 141837; the Intel Arc A570M scores 58239. The delta is 143.5 percent in the A4500's favor, and the head-to-head tally stands at one win for the A4500 and zero for the A570M.

That result is consistent with the A4500's wider record. It also posts 129980 in Geekbench Vulkan and 3196 in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), tests for which the A570M has no recorded scores in the database. Its average score of 91671 places it in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs, with rivals like the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 just 0.9 percent ahead (92466) and the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 trailing by 4.8 percent (87445). The A570M's average of 58239 puts it in the 88th percentile, in a cluster where the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT sits 0.3 percent above it and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 sits 0.7 percent above it.

Context matters when reading those percentiles. Both GPUs rank highly against the full database population, which includes vast numbers of integrated and entry-level parts, but within their own tiers the A4500 competes with professional accelerators while the A570M competes with mainstream desktop cards. The 143.5 percent head-to-head gap is the cleanest measure of the distance between them.

The Verdict

The data points one way for anyone with workload demands: the RTX A4500 is decisively the stronger GPU. It offers more than four times the shading units, roughly four and a half times the FP32 throughput, two and a half times the memory capacity, and nearly three times the memory bandwidth of the Arc A570M. Its 224 tensor cores and workstation-class positioning suit it to professional rendering and compute tasks, and its measured OpenCL result more than doubles the A570M's.

The case for the A570M rests entirely on form factor and platform recency. It is a 75 W mobile part with no power connectors and no slot footprint, built on a newer 6 nm process, and it remains in active production while the A4500 is end-of-life. For a portable system where a 200 W dual-slot board drawing from an 8-pin connector is simply not an option, the A570M exists and the A4500 does not fit. Within that constraint, its percentile placement shows it performing respectably against the broader GPU population. Nothing in the recorded data suggests it competes with the A4500 on performance; the choice is really about whether the A4500's class of hardware is even on the table.

Specification Differences

The fields where the two differ, per the database:

• Manufacturer and chip: NVIDIA GA102 (Ampere, Workstation Ampere Ax000 generation) versus Intel DG2-256 (Xe-HPG, Alchemist Arc 5 Mobile generation).
• Process and foundry: 8 nm at Samsung versus 6 nm at TSMC.
• Silicon: 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die (45.1M/mm²) versus 11,500 million on a 269 mm² die (42.8M/mm²).
• Clocks: 1050 MHz base and 1650 MHz boost versus 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost; memory at 16 Gbps effective versus 14 Gbps effective.
• Memory: 20 GB GDDR6, 320-bit, 640.0 GB/s versus 8 GB GDDR6, 128-bit, 224.0 GB/s.
• Shader resources: 7168 shading units, 224 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 56 RT cores, 224 tensor cores versus 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 16 RT cores, and no tensor cores listed.
• Throughput: 158.4 GPixel/s pixel rate and 369.6 GTexel/s texture rate versus 83.20 GPixel/s and 166.4 GTexel/s; FP32 at 23.65 TFLOPS (FP16 1:1) versus 5.325 TFLOPS (FP16 2:1, reaching 10.65 TFLOPS).
• Power and form factor: 200 W TDP, dual-slot, one 8-pin connector, 550 W suggested PSU versus 75 W TDP, IGP slot class, no power connector and no suggested PSU listed.
• Bus and displays: PCIe 4.0 x16 with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a versus PCIe 4.0 x8 with portable-device-dependent outputs.
• Physical: the A4500 measures 267 mm long and 112 mm tall; no dimensions are listed for the A570M.
• Status and dates: end-of-life, released 2021-11-22, with Quadro Turing predecessor and Workstation Ada successor, versus active, released 2023-07-31, with no listed predecessor or successor.

Shared fields include API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate 12_2, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4), memory type (GDDR6), and the absence of a launch MSRP in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A4500 wins on every performance-oriented axis in the data. In compute workloads, its OpenCL score of 141837 against 58239 makes it the clear choice for GPU compute, aided by 224 tensor cores and 1:1 FP16 throughput at 23.65 TFLOPS. In graphics throughput, its 369.6 GTexel/s texture rate and 158.4 GPixel/s pixel rate more than double the A570M's figures, and its 56 RT cores against 16 favor ray-tracing-heavy professional rendering. In memory-bound workloads, 20 GB of capacity and 640.0 GB/s of bandwidth dwarf 8 GB and 224.0 GB/s, which matters for large scenes, datasets, and multi-display professional setups driven through four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Its benchmark record also runs deeper, with Vulkan and 3DMark Steel Nomad results that the A570M simply does not have in the database.

The Arc A570M wins on platform fit and efficiency-adjacent facts. It draws 75 W against 200 W, needs no power connector, no PSU recommendation, and no expansion slot, and it runs on the newer 6 nm node. It is an active product with a 2023 release date, whereas the A4500 is end-of-life silicon from 2021. Its percentile placement, 88th against the full GPU population, shows it holding its own among mainstream hardware, bracketed by rivals like the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM and the AMD Radeon PRO V710.

The bottom line from the recorded data: choose the RTX A4500 wherever raw capability, memory, and compute throughput decide the outcome, because it wins the only direct comparison by 143.5 percent. Choose the Arc A570M only where a mobile, low-power, connector-free form factor is the governing requirement, since the data shows no benchmark category in which it outperforms the A4500.