Intel Arc A580 vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Arc A580 across all three shared benchmark tests. The largest margin appears in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, where the Arc A580 scores 2229 against the RTX A2000’s 1345, a 65.7% advantage. This is a substantial gap that points to a major difference in raw DirectX 12 rasterization throughput between the two cards. The Arc A580’s pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s versus 57.60 GPixel/s for the RTX A2000 helps explain this outcome, as does the Arc’s texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s compared to 124.8 GTexel/s.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Arc A580 again leads, scoring 91657 against 67695 for the RTX A2000. That works out to a 35.4% delta. The OpenCL result is interesting because it often reflects compute-oriented workloads rather than pure graphics. The Arc A580’s FP32 throughput of 12.29 TFLOPS is about 54% higher than the RTX A2000’s 7.987 TFLOPS, which aligns closely with the observed performance difference. The Arc A580 also has 3072 shading units, while the RTX A2000 has 3328, yet the Intel card still wins in FP32 due to its much higher boost clock of 2000 MHz versus 1200 MHz.

The closest contest appears in Geekbench Vulkan, where the Arc A580 scores 79381 and the RTX A2000 scores 69089, a 14.9% lead for Intel. Vulkan results often depend heavily on driver efficiency and command-buffer overhead. The Arc A580’s advantage here is real but narrower than in the other two tests, suggesting that NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture remains competitive in low-level API scenarios despite the older process node and lower raw specifications.

Across the three tests, the Arc A580 wins 3 out of 3, and the RTX A2000 records no victories. The average benchmark score in the database confirms the overall trend: the Arc A580 sits at 57756, while the RTX A2000 trails at 46043. That is a 25.4% gap in the aggregate measurement.

Where Each One Wins

The data does not show any test where the NVIDIA RTX A2000 takes the lead. However, the analysis should look beyond the raw scores to understand where each card might still serve a purpose. The RTX A2000’s nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation at 45972 (a 0.2% delta) and the Intel Arc A730M at 45592 (a 1% delta). This places the A2000 in a performance tier that is close to mid-range laptop GPUs and lower-tier workstation parts. Its 85th percentile among all GPUs means it still outperforms a large majority of installed graphics hardware, even if it loses to the Arc A580 in these specific tests.

The Arc A580, by contrast, sits at the 87th percentile, and its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM at 58085 (a -0.6% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE at 57367 (a 0.7% delta), and the Intel Arc A570M at 58239 (a -0.8% delta). The Arc A580’s position among these rivals suggests it trades blows with a range of AMD desktop parts, some of which are significantly newer or older. The delta values are all within roughly one percent, meaning the Arc A580 lands in a tightly contested performance band.

For use-case analysis, the Arc A580’s wins in DX12 and OpenCL indicate it is better suited for modern game engines and general-purpose compute workloads such as rendering, simulation, and data-parallel tasks. The RTX A2000’s advantage, if any, would have to come from features not captured in these benchmark scores, such as its tensor cores or driver optimizations for specific professional applications. The data does not include tests that would isolate those capabilities, so any such conclusion would be speculative.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Arc A580 uses the DG2-512 chip built on Xe-HPG architecture, manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The die measures 406 mm² and contains 21,700 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 53.4 million per mm². The NVIDIA RTX A2000 uses the GA106 chip on Ampere architecture, manufactured on an 8 nm process at Samsung. Its die is 276 mm² with 12,000 million transistors, for a density of 43.5 million per mm². The Intel chip is both larger and denser, which partly explains its higher performance ceilings.

Memory configurations also differ sharply. The Arc A580 carries 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, producing 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A2000 has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s. The Arc A580’s memory clock runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective transfer, while the RTX A2000 runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective. The bandwidth advantage for Intel is 78%, which matters in high-resolution textures and large dataset workloads.

Compute resources tell a more nuanced story. The Arc A580 has 3072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units. The RTX A2000 has 3328 shading units, 104 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units, the Arc A580’s higher clock speeds give it the FP32 edge. The RTX A2000 does include 104 tensor cores and 26 RT cores, while the Arc A580 lists 24 RT cores and no tensor core count in the database. The FP16 figures also differ: the Arc A580 delivers 24.58 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the RTX A2000 delivers 7.987 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. This means the Intel card has a much larger half-precision capability, which can matter in AI inference and certain scientific workloads.

Power and physical design diverge considerably. The Arc A580 has a TDP of 175 W, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and a suggested 450 W power supply. The RTX A2000 has a TDP of 70 W, needs no power connectors, and only a 250 W suggested PSU. The RTX A2000 measures 167 mm in length and 69 mm in height, while the Arc A580’s dimensions are not recorded. Both are dual-slot cards with PCIe 4.0 x16 interfaces. The Arc A580 offers one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, whereas the RTX A2000 provides four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded benchmark data, the Intel Arc A580 is the faster card. It wins all three head-to-head tests, including the demanding DX12 Steel Nomad test by 65.7%. Its average benchmark score of 57756 exceeds the RTX A2000’s 46043 by a clear margin. The Arc A580 also carries more memory, higher bandwidth, and greater compute throughput in both FP32 and FP16.

The RTX A2000 is not without merit, but its strengths do not appear in these particular measurements. It is an end-of-life product, released in August 2021, while the Arc A580 launched in October 2023. The RTX A2000’s 70 W TDP and lack of external power connectors make it far easier to install in constrained systems. Its 6 GB memory and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are lower, but the card’s compact 167 mm length could fit where the Arc A580 might not. The RTX A2000 also includes tensor cores, which the Arc A580 does not list, potentially giving it an edge in some professional applications that leverage those units.

For users prioritizing raw performance in DX12, OpenCL, and Vulkan, the data points clearly to the Arc A580. For those needing a low-power, compact workstation card with tensor core support, the RTX A2000 remains a viable option, but the benchmark evidence shows it trails the Intel part in every measured category.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A580 has an average benchmark score of 57756, while the NVIDIA RTX A2000 scores 46043.

Q: How large is the Arc A580’s lead in the DX12 Steel Nomad test?

A: The Arc A580 scores 2229 against the RTX A2000’s 1345, a 65.7% advantage.

Q: Does the RTX A2000 win any of the head-to-head tests?

A: No, the RTX A2000 wins 0 out of 3 tests. The Arc A580 wins all three.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Arc A580 provides 512.0 GB/s, while the RTX A2000 provides 288.0 GB/s.

Q: Which card has a lower power requirement?

A: The RTX A2000 has a 70 W TDP and requires no power connectors, while the Arc A580 has a 175 W TDP and needs two 8-pin connectors.

Q: How do their launch dates compare?

A: The RTX A2000 was released in August 2021, and the Arc A580 was released in October 2023.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc A580 | NVIDIA RTX A2000 |

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

| Chip | DG2-512 | GA106 |

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Ampere |

| Generation | Alchemist (Arc 5) | Workstation Ampere (Ax000) |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

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

| Die Size | 406 mm² | 276 mm² |

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

| Base Clock | 1700 MHz | 562 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2000 MHz | 1200 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz, 12 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 6 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3072 | 3328 |

| TMUs | 192 | 104 |

| ROPs | 96 | 48 |

| RT Cores | 24 | 26 |

| Tensor Cores | Not listed | 104 |

| Pixel Rate | 192.0 GPixel/s | 57.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 384.0 GTexel/s | 124.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 12.29 TFLOPS | 7.987 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) | 7.987 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 175 W | 70 W |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 250 W |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0 | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Dimensions | Not recorded | 167 mm length, 69 mm height |

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

| Release Date | 2023-10-09 | 2021-08-09 |

| Predecessor | Xe Graphics | Quadro Turing |

| Successor | Battlemage | Workstation Ada |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 449 USD |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 87 | 85 |