Intel Arc A730M vs NVIDIA A2 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Arc A730M dominates the NVIDIA A2 in every recorded test. Across the two shared workloads, the Arc A730M took both wins, with no tests going the A2's way.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Arc A730M scored 70,352 against the A2's 35,357. That is a 99% advantage, meaning the Intel part delivers nearly double the raw compute throughput in this test. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap narrows slightly but remains massive: 64,693 versus 34,023, a 90.1% lead for the Arc A730M. These are not marginal wins; they represent a generational-class difference in GPU compute performance.

Looking at the broader database context, the Arc A730M sits at the 84th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 45,592. The A2, by contrast, is at the 79th percentile with an average score of 34,690. That 10,902-point gap in average score translates to a roughly 31% overall performance advantage for the Intel part across the entire database, not just the head-to-head tests.

The nearest rival data reinforces this picture. The Arc A730M's closest competitors include the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation (average score 45,972, just 0.8% above) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile (45,152, 1% below). The A2, meanwhile, sits alongside the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB (34,561, 0.4% below) and the AMD Radeon HD 7970 (34,541, 0.4% below). In other words, the A2 competes in a far lower performance tier, one populated by older or smaller GPUs, while the Arc A730M is positioned near modern high-end mobile parts.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing processes. The Intel Arc A730M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the Alchemist generation for Arc 7 Mobile. It uses the DG2-512 chip, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The die contains 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 53.4 million per square millimeter.

The NVIDIA A2 uses the Ampere architecture, from the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) generation. It employs the GA107 chip, manufactured on Samsung's 8 nm process. The die is substantially smaller at 200 mm² and holds 8,700 million transistors, giving a density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. The Intel chip is more than twice the size and carries roughly 2.5 times the transistor count.

Core configurations diverge sharply. The Arc A730M has 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units. It also includes 24 ray tracing cores. The A2 has 1,280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with 10 ray tracing cores. The A2 does include 40 tensor cores, which the Arc A730M lacks entirely. This reflects their different target workloads: the A2 is a workstation inference card, while the Arc A730M is a mobile gaming GPU.

Clock behavior also differs. The Intel chip runs at a 1100 MHz base clock and boosts to 2050 MHz. The NVIDIA chip starts higher at 1440 MHz base but boosts to only 1770 MHz. Despite the lower base clock, the Arc A730M's much larger core count and higher boost clock drive its substantial performance advantage.

Memory subsystems are distinct as well. The Arc A730M has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The A2 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, but only 200.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part has 68% more memory bandwidth, which helps in texture-heavy and compute-intensive workloads. The A2's larger capacity, however, suits AI inference models that need to hold more weights or activations in memory.

The Intel GPU connects via PCIe 4.0 x16, while the A2 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The A2 is a single-slot card with no power connectors and no display outputs, indicating it is designed for server or accelerator use. The Arc A730M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with portable-device-dependent outputs, meaning it is soldered into laptops. The A2's TDP is 60 W, while the Arc A730M is rated at 80 W.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the Intel Arc A730M is the overwhelmingly faster GPU in raw compute and graphics workloads. Its 99% lead in OpenCL and 90.1% lead in Vulkan are decisive. The average benchmark score difference of roughly 31% in favor of the Arc A730M confirms this is not a test-specific fluke.

However, the A2 is not without purpose. Its 16 GB memory capacity exceeds the Arc A730M's 12 GB, and it includes tensor cores for AI acceleration. For workloads that depend on tensor operations, large model residency, or low power draw (60 W versus 80 W), the A2 may be the appropriate choice. The A2's 40 tensor cores and 1:1 FP16 ratio (4.531 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16) indicate it is built for inference tasks where the Arc A730M's 2:1 FP16 ratio (25.19 TFLOPS) would not help if tensor operations are required.

For gaming, rendering, or general GPU compute, the Arc A730M is the superior part by every recorded metric. The A2 should only be selected when its specific workstation features, namely tensor cores and larger memory pool, are mandatory.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A730M has an average benchmark score of 45,592, compared to the NVIDIA A2's 34,690. The Arc A730M also ranks at the 84th percentile among all GPUs, while the A2 ranks at the 79th.

Q: How much faster is the Arc A730M in OpenCL?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the Arc A730M scores 70,352 versus the A2's 35,357, a 99% advantage.

Q: Does the NVIDIA A2 have any memory advantage?

A: Yes, the A2 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the Arc A730M has 12 GB. However, the Arc A730M has higher bandwidth at 336.0 GB/s versus 200.1 GB/s.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc A730M is rated at 80 W, while the NVIDIA A2 is rated at 60 W.

Q: Which GPU includes tensor cores?

A: Only the NVIDIA A2 includes tensor cores, with 40 of them. The Intel Arc A730M has no tensor cores.

Q: What process nodes are used?

A: The Intel Arc A730M uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the NVIDIA A2 uses an 8 nm process at Samsung.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A730M wins decisively in compute-heavy graphics workloads. Its 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs provide a massive fill-rate advantage: 196.8 GPixel/s pixel rate and 393.6 GTexel/s texture rate, versus the A2's 56.64 GPixel/s and 70.80 GTexel/s. The 12.60 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is nearly three times the A2's 4.531 TFLOPS. Any application that stresses raw shader performance, rasterization, or texture filtering will favor the Arc A730M.

The NVIDIA A2 wins in scenarios that require tensor core acceleration. Its 40 tensor cores, combined with 16 GB memory and a 1:1 FP16 ratio, make it suitable for AI inference workloads that cannot use the Arc A730M's 2:1 FP16 path. The A2 also draws less power (60 W versus 80 W), making it more efficient in power-constrained server environments. Its single-slot, no-connector, no-display design is optimized for dense accelerator deployments.

The Arc A730M's PCIe 4.0 x16 interface provides double the lane width of the A2's x8 connection, which can benefit data transfer in certain workloads. But the A2's 16 GB capacity allows larger datasets to reside in GPU memory, which may be the deciding factor in memory-bound inference tasks.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc A730M | NVIDIA A2 |

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

| Architecture | Xe-HPG (Alchemist) | Ampere (Workstation Ax000) |

| Process Node | 6 nm (TSMC) | 8 nm (Samsung) |

| Transistors | 21,700 million | 8,700 million |

| Die Size | 406 mm² | 200 mm² |

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

| Base Clock | 1100 MHz | 1440 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2050 MHz | 1770 MHz |

| Memory Size | 12 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 336.0 GB/s | 200.1 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3072 | 1280 |

| TMUs | 192 | 40 |

| ROPs | 96 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 24 | 10 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 40 |

| Pixel Rate | 196.8 GPixel/s | 56.64 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 393.6 GTexel/s | 70.80 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 12.60 TFLOPS | 4.531 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 25.19 TFLOPS (2:1) | 4.531 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 80 W | 60 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | No outputs |

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