Intel Arc A730M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep in favor of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 across all three shared benchmark tests. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RTX 4090 scores 9,223 against the Intel Arc A730M’s 1,732, a difference of 432.5%. That is not a marginal gap; it represents a completely different performance class in modern DirectX 12 workloads. The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the RTX 4090 at 255,416 versus 70,352 for the Arc A730M, a 263.1% advantage. Geekbench Vulkan results are similarly lopsided: 271,631 against 64,693, putting the NVIDIA part 319.9% ahead.

The pattern across these three tests is consistent: the RTX 4090 leads by a factor of roughly 3.6 to 5.3 depending on the workload. The largest relative margin appears in the DX12 Steel Nomad test, which is likely the most demanding of the three in terms of raw graphics throughput. The Vulkan result, while still a massive win for NVIDIA, is slightly closer in percentage terms than the DX12 result, though the absolute point difference remains enormous. OpenCL shows the smallest relative gap, but 263.1% is still a dominant margin.

Looking at the average benchmark score from the database, the RTX 4090 sits at 60,347, while the Arc A730M averages 45,592. That places the NVIDIA card at roughly 32% higher on average across all recorded tests, though the head-to-head numbers above are the more precise comparison for identical workloads. The RTX 4090’s percentile rank among all GPUs is 88, while the Arc A730M sits at 84. Both are above the median, but the percentile difference confirms that the NVIDIA part lands in a higher tier of overall performance.

The nearest rivals in the database provide additional context. For the RTX 4090, the closest competitors by average score include the Intel Arc Pro A60 at 60,326 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M at 61,896 (2.5% higher), and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 at 58,657 (2.9% lower). This suggests that the RTX 4090’s average score is tightly clustered with professional workstation cards, despite being a consumer flagship. For the Arc A730M, the nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT at 45,384 (0.5% higher), the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation at 45,972 (0.8% higher), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile at 45,152 (1% lower). The Arc A730M thus sits in a mid-range mobile GPU tier, far below the desktop flagship class occupied by the RTX 4090.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 4090 is built on NVIDIA’s Ada Lovelace architecture using the AD102 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The die measures 609 mm² and contains 76,300 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 125.3 million per square millimeter. The Arc A730M uses Intel’s Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-512 chip, also from TSMC but on a 6 nm process. Its die is 406 mm² with 21,700 million transistors, giving a density of 53.4 million per square millimeter. The process node difference (5 nm versus 6 nm) and the much larger transistor count on the NVIDIA side explain a significant portion of the performance gap.

The RTX 4090 features 16,384 shading units, 512 texture mapping units, 176 ROPs, 128 ray tracing cores, and 512 tensor cores. The Arc A730M has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 24 ray tracing cores, with no tensor core count listed in the database. The shading unit count is more than five times higher on the NVIDIA part, which directly translates to the massive FP32 throughput difference: 82.58 TFLOPS versus 12.60 TFLOPS. The texture rate also reflects this: 1,290.2 GTexel/s versus 393.6 GTexel/s. Pixel rate is 443.5 GPixel/s versus 196.8 GPixel/s.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The RTX 4090 ships with 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus, achieving 1.01 TB/s bandwidth. The Arc A730M has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. That is roughly three times less memory bandwidth, which matters for high-resolution textures and compute workloads. The RTX 4090’s memory clock is listed as 1,313 MHz with 21 Gbps effective, while the Arc A730M runs at 1,750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective. The NVIDIA part’s wider bus compensates for the lower memory clock, resulting in far higher total bandwidth.

FP16 performance differs in ratio as well. The RTX 4090 achieves 82.58 TFLOPS in FP16 with a 1:1 ratio to FP32. The Arc A730M reaches 25.19 TFLOPS in FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, meaning it doubles its FP32 rate for half-precision work. Despite this efficiency advantage for the Intel part in relative terms, the absolute FP16 number still trails NVIDIA’s by more than three times.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 for both. The RTX 4090 is a triple-slot card with a 450 W TDP and requires an 850 W power supply, using a single 16-pin connector. The Arc A730M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with an 80 W TDP, no power connectors listed, and no suggested PSU. Display outputs differ: the RTX 4090 has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Arc A730M’s outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear conclusion: the RTX 4090 is in an entirely different performance tier. Every shared benchmark shows it ahead by at least 263%, and the architectural specifications reinforce that dominance. The RTX 4090 has more than five times the shading units, roughly four times the memory bandwidth, and over six times the transistor count. The Arc A730M cannot compete on raw performance in any measured test.

However, the Arc A730M is a mobile integrated solution with an 80 W TDP, while the RTX 4090 is a desktop triple-slot card drawing 450 W. These are different product categories. The Arc A730M is positioned for laptops where power and space are constrained, while the RTX 4090 targets enthusiast desktop builds with high-end power supplies and chassis. The database records no release date for the Arc A730M, but both are marked end-of-life.

For users who need maximum frame rates in DX12 and Vulkan titles, the RTX 4090 is the only choice based on these numbers. For users constrained to a mobile form factor, the Arc A730M provides a mid-range baseline, but it will not approach the RTX 4090’s performance in any workload. The RTX 4090’s nearest rivals are workstation GPUs like the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M and Intel Arc Pro A60, which indicates its performance ceiling is shared with professional compute cards. The Arc A730M’s nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA RTX A2000 and GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile, are also mid-range parts, confirming its lower standing.

Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 | Intel Arc A730M |

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

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Xe-HPG |

| Chip | AD102 | DG2-512 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 76,300 million | 21,700 million |

| Die Size | 609 mm² | 406 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 125.3M / mm² | 53.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2235 MHz | 1100 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2520 MHz | 2050 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1313 MHz, 21 Gbps effective | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 24 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6X | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 1.01 TB/s | 336.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 16,384 | 3,072 |

| TMUs | 512 | 192 |

| ROPs | 176 | 96 |

| RT Cores | 128 | 24 |

| Tensor Cores | 512 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 443.5 GPixel/s | 196.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,290.2 GTexel/s | 393.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 82.58 TFLOPS | 12.60 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 82.58 TFLOPS (1:1) | 25.19 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 450 W | 80 W |

| Slot Width | Triple-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | null |

| Suggested PSU | 850 W | null |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

| Release Date | 2022-09-19 | null |

| Launch MSRP | 1,599 USD | null |

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 scores 9,223 versus 1,732 for the Intel Arc A730M, a 432.5% advantage.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4090 in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The RTX 4090 scores 271,631 while the Arc A730M scores 64,693, making the NVIDIA part 319.9% faster.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 4090 has 1.01 TB/s bandwidth from 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus. The Arc A730M has 336.0 GB/s from 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus.

Q: Does the Arc A730M have tensor cores?

A: The database does not list a tensor core count for the Arc A730M. The RTX 4090 has 512 tensor cores.

Q: Are both GPUs end-of-life?

A: Yes, the database marks both the RTX 4090 and the Arc A730M as end-of-life production status.

Q: What is the TDP for each card?

A: The RTX 4090 has a 450 W TDP and requires an 850 W suggested PSU. The Arc A730M has an 80 W TDP and lists no power connector or PSU requirement.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4090 wins every recorded benchmark. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it leads by 432.5%. In Geekbench OpenCL, the margin is 263.1%. In Geekbench Vulkan, it is 319.9%. There is no test in the shared dataset where the Arc A730M comes out ahead. The RTX 4090 also wins on every architectural specification that affects throughput: shading units, TMUs, ROPs, RT cores, memory size, memory bus width, bandwidth, pixel rate, texture rate, FP32, and FP16. Its launch MSRP is 1,599 USD, but the performance per watt is not the point here; the absolute performance is.

The Arc A730M’s wins are limited to efficiency-oriented categories. It has a lower TDP at 80 W versus 450 W, which makes it suitable for mobile or integrated implementations. Its FP16 performance ratio is 2:1, meaning it doubles its FP32 throughput for half-precision tasks, whereas the RTX 4090 runs FP16 at 1:1. In absolute terms, however, the RTX 4090 still produces 82.58 TFLOPS in FP16 versus 25.19 TFLOPS for the Arc A730M, so the ratio advantage does not translate into a performance win. The Arc A730M also has no dimensions listed, reinforcing its status as a portable device component rather than a standalone expansion card.

For use cases, the RTX 4090 is the clear pick for desktop gaming, high-resolution rendering, and compute-heavy workloads where power draw is not a constraint. The Arc A730M is the only option among the two for thin-and-light laptops or integrated systems, but the data shows it will deliver roughly one-quarter to one-fifth the performance in identical tests. Users who already own a desktop system with a compatible power supply should select the RTX 4090. Users who require a mobile GPU with no external power connectors have only the Arc A730M as a viable choice from this pair. The database records no wins for the Arc A730M in any head-to-head benchmark, so its selection must be based on form factor and power constraints rather than performance.