Intel Arc A580 vs NVIDIA CMP 40HX Comparison

The Verdict

The NVIDIA CMP 40HX and Intel Arc A580 are two very different products that happen to land near each other in raw compute benchmarks. The data shows a near-total tie in the two shared tests, with each card taking one win by a narrow margin. However, the practical decision is not about performance parity, it is about what you need the card to do.

The CMP 40HX is a mining-specific GPU with no display outputs. It is end-of-life, uses a PCIe 1.0 x4 interface, and scores in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score is 85,637. If you need a compute-only card for a headless workstation, and you can live with the legacy bus interface, the CMP 40HX is the pick.

The Arc A580 is an active, current-generation GPU with full display outputs (HDMI and DisplayPort), a modern PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, and a higher peak clock speed. Its average benchmark score is 57,756, which is much lower than the CMP 40HX, but that average includes a 3DMark result that the NVIDIA card does not have. For gaming, content creation, or any task requiring a display, the Arc A580 is the only sensible choice.

The data says: if you need outputs, buy Intel. If you need raw compute and have the right motherboard, the CMP 40HX is slightly ahead in OpenCL. There is no scenario where both cards fit the same build.

Architecture Differences

The CMP 40HX uses NVIDA's Turing architecture, built on a 12 nm TSMC process. The die measures 445 mm² and packs 10,800 million transistors, giving a density of 24.3 million transistors per mm². It has 36 ray tracing cores and 288 tensor cores, plus 2,304 shading units. The memory runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed.

The Arc A580 uses Intel's Xe-HPG architecture (Alchemist generation), built on a 6 nm TSMC process. The die is 406 mm², slightly smaller, but packs 21,700 million transistors, more than double the count. That yields a density of 53.4M transistors per mm². The Arc has 24 ray tracing cores, no tensor cores, and 3,072 shading units. Memory runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective.

The biggest architectural difference is the interface. The CMP 40HX uses PCIe 1.0 x4, which is a severe bottleneck for data transfer. The Arc A580 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, which is 16 times the lanes at a much newer standard. For any workload that involves reading or writing to system memory, the Arc has a massive structural advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two shared tests between these cards.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA CMP 40HX scores 93,395 against the Intel Arc A580's 91,657. The NVIDIA card wins by 1.9%. That is a narrow margin, but it is consistent with the CMP 40HX's higher average benchmark score (85,637) versus the Arc's 57,756. The compute-optimized Turing chip with its tensor cores delivers slightly more raw OpenCL throughput.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the tables turn. The Intel Arc A580 scores 79,381, beating the CMP 40HX's 77,879 by 1.9%. The Arc's higher shading unit count (3,072 vs 2,304) and faster memory (512 GB/s vs 448 GB/s) likely contribute to this win.

The head-to-head record is exactly 1-1. No clear overall winner in these two tests. The margin of victory is identical (1.9%) in both directions. If you average the two scores, the CMP 40HX has a slight edge (85,637 vs 57,756 average, but that is skewed by the Arc's 3DMark score).

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Vulkan?

A: The Intel Arc A580 wins Geekbench Vulkan by 1.9%, scoring 79,381 versus 77,879 for the CMP 40HX.

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 40HX wins Geekbench OpenCL by 1.9%, scoring 93,395 versus 91,657 for the Arc A580.

Q: Can I use either card for gaming?

A: The CMP 40HX has no display outputs, so it cannot drive a monitor. The Arc A580 has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 2.0, so it can.

Q: Which card has a better memory interface?

A: The Arc A580 has a 512.0 GB/s bandwidth over a 256-bit bus. The CMP 40HX has 448.0 GB/s over the same 256-bit bus. The Arc is 14.3% faster in raw bandwidth.

Q: Which card is more reliable for modern software?

A: The Arc A580 is an active product (production status "Active") and has a successor (Battlemage). The CMP 40HX is end-of-life with no successor. The Arc also uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the CMP 40HX is stuck on PCIe 1.0 x4.

Q: Which card is better for compute workloads?

A: In the shared Geekbench OpenCL test, the CMP 40HX is ahead by 1.9%. However, the Arc A580 has more shading units (3,072 vs 2,304) and a higher FP32 throughput (12.29 TFLOPS vs 7.603 TFLOPS). The CMP 40HX has dedicated tensor cores (288) which may help in AI tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The CMP 40HX wins in raw OpenCL compute. It scores 93,395, which is 1.9% higher than the Arc. It also has a higher average benchmark score (85,637) and a 93rd percentile rating versus 87th for the Arc. If your workload is OpenCL-heavy and you have a motherboard that supports PCIe 1.0 x4, the CMP 40HX is the better compute engine.

The Arc A580 wins in Vulkan performance. It scores 79,381, which is 1.9% higher. It also has a 512 GB/s memory bandwidth, higher pixel rate (192 GPixel/s vs 105.6 GPixel/s), and higher texture rate (384 GTexel/s vs 237.6 GTexel/s). The Arc has double the ROPs (96 vs 64) and more texture mapping units (192 vs 144). This translates to better rasterized graphics performance.

For any task that requires a display, the Arc wins by default because the CMP 40HX has no outputs. For any task that requires a modern PCIe connection, the Arc wins because the CMP 40HX uses PCIe 1.0 x4.

Specification Differences

| Spec | NVIDIA CMP 40HX | Intel Arc A580 |

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

| Architecture | Turing | Xe-HPG |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 10,800 million | 21,700 million |

| Die Size | 445 mm² | 406 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.3M / mm² | 53.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1470 MHz | 1700 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1650 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB GDDR6 | 8 GB GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 448.0 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2304 | 3072 |

| Texture Mapping Units | 144 | 192 |

| Raster Operation Units | 64 | 96 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 36 | 24 |

| Tensor Cores | 288 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 105.6 GPixel/s | 192.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 237.6 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.603 TFLOPS | 12.29 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 15.21 TFLOPS (2:1) | 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 185 W | 175 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 1.0 x4 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0 |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.4 |

| Length | 229 mm (9 inches) | null |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | null |

| Width | 35 mm (1.4 inches) | null |

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

| Launch MSRP | 699 USD | null |

The specs show a clear split: the Arc A580 is a modern graphics card with more raw throughput, higher clocks, and a proper PCIe interface. The CMP 40HX is a compute card with tensor cores and no display, but its only advantage is the 36 RT cores (vs 24) and the 288 tensor cores (vs none). The Arc has a 21.7% higher FP32 rate (12.29 vs 7.603 TFLOPS), 50% more shading units, and a 14.3% memory bandwidth advantage. The CMP 40HX has a slightly higher TDP (185W vs 175W) and requires only one 8-pin power connector, while the Arc requires two 8-pin connectors. Both share the same suggested PSU (450W) and the same dual-slot width.