Intel Arc A730M vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data places the Intel Arc A730M ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB in both shared benchmark tests. The largest margin appears in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, where the Arc A730M scores 1,732 against the RTX A2000's 1,309. That is a 32.3% advantage for the Intel part, a decisive gap in a modern DirectX 12 workload. The Arc A730M also leads in Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 70,352 versus 66,998, a smaller but still clear 5% margin.

The average benchmark scores tell a complementary story. The Arc A730M holds an average of 45,592 across its recorded tests, while the RTX A2000 averages 34,154. That is a substantial overall difference, and it aligns with the percentile rankings: the Arc A730M sits at the 84th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the RTX A2000 sits at the 79th. The nearest rivals for each part further contextualize these results. The Arc A730M's closest competitor is the NVIDIA RTX A2000 itself, with a delta of -1%; the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT is 0.5% behind, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile is 1% ahead. The RTX A2000, meanwhile, trades blows with the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA RTX A1000 (-0.2%), and the AMD Radeon RX 480 (0.5% ahead), with the NVIDIA TITAN V 0.6% ahead of it.

The head-to-head data shows no benchmark where the RTX A2000 comes out on top. The win count is 2 for the Arc A730M and 0 for the RTX A2000. The RTX A2000's best relative showing is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the 5% deficit is much narrower than the 32.3% deficit in 3DMark Steel Nomad. This suggests the two cards are closer in compute-oriented tasks that stress raw shader throughput, while the Intel part pulls far ahead in a full graphics pipeline test that includes rasterization and geometry processing.

Where Each One Wins

Looking strictly at the benchmark wins, the Intel Arc A730M is the clear victor in both recorded tests. Its strongest area is the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 workload, where the 32.3% lead indicates a significant advantage in modern gaming-style rendering. The Geekbench OpenCL result, while also a win, is a narrower 5% margin, pointing to a more competitive field in general-purpose compute. For users prioritizing DirectX 12 gaming performance, the data strongly favors the Arc A730M.

The NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB does not record a single win in the shared tests. However, the data still shows it is not far behind in OpenCL compute. The 66,998 score is within 5% of the Intel part, and its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A1000 at just 0.2% lower, meaning the RTX A2000 is competitive within its own performance tier. The RTX A2000's advantages are not visible in the benchmark scores, but they appear in other recorded fields: it has a lower TDP of 70 W versus 80 W for the Arc A730M, and it is a dual-slot card with a fixed 167 mm length and 69 mm height, making it a more predictable physical fit for workstation chassis. The Arc A730M, by contrast, is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics package) with portable-device-dependent outputs, which suits mobile or embedded designs rather than standalone desktop installation.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Arc A730M uses the DG2-512 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It packs 21,700 million transistors into a 406 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 53.4 million per mm². The NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB uses the GA106 chip on the Ampere architecture, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung, with 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die, for a density of 43.5 million per mm². The Intel chip is larger and denser, which helps explain its higher raw throughput numbers.

The compute resources differ significantly. The Arc A730M has 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs, while the RTX A2000 has 3,328 shading units, 104 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The Intel part has fewer shaders but far more texture and pixel processing hardware, which aligns with its 32.3% lead in the 3DMark Steel Nomad test. The RTX A2000 compensates with 104 tensor cores and 26 RT cores, whereas the Arc A730M lists 24 RT cores and no tensor cores. The NVIDIA card is built for workstation workloads that leverage tensor acceleration, while the Intel card appears optimized for rasterization and traditional graphics.

Memory configurations are similar in capacity but differ in speed. Both use 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. The Arc A730M runs its memory at 1750 MHz for 14 Gbps effective, producing 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A2000 runs at 1500 MHz for 12 Gbps effective, yielding 288.0 GB/s. The Intel part has a 48.0 GB/s bandwidth advantage, which contributes to its higher pixel rate of 196.8 GPixel/s versus 57.60 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA card. The texture rate also favors Intel heavily: 393.6 GTexel/s versus 124.8 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The Arc A730M boosts to 2050 MHz from a 1100 MHz base, while the RTX A2000 boosts to just 1200 MHz from a 562 MHz base. The Intel chip runs at nearly double the boost clock, which explains its FP32 output of 12.60 TFLOPS against the RTX A2000's 7.987 TFLOPS. The FP16 comparison is stark: the Arc A730M achieves 25.19 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the RTX A2000 delivers 7.987 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The NVIDIA card's tensor cores are not reflected in these FP16 figures, but they are present for dedicated AI workloads.

The power envelopes are close: the Arc A730M is rated at 80 W TDP, the RTX A2000 at 70 W. The RTX A2000 requires no external power connectors and suggests a 250 W PSU, while the Arc A730M lists no power connector information and is described as an IGP. Both support PCIe 4.0 x16, DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is not a differentiator.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A730M averages 45,592 across its recorded tests, while the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB averages 34,154. The Arc A730M also holds the 84th percentile among all GPUs, compared to the 79th for the RTX A2000.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test?

A: The Intel Arc A730M scores 1,732, and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 scores 1,309. That gives the Intel part a 32.3% advantage, the largest recorded margin between the two in any test.

Q: Does the NVIDIA RTX A2000 win in any benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows 2 wins for the Intel Arc A730M and 0 for the RTX A2000. The closest the RTX A2000 comes is in Geekbench OpenCL, where it trails by 5%.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures for each card?

A: The Intel Arc A730M has 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 has 288.0 GB/s. Both use 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus.

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 has 3,328 shading units, slightly more than the Intel Arc A730M's 3,072. However, the Intel part has 192 TMUs and 96 ROPs, versus 104 TMUs and 48 ROPs for the NVIDIA card.

Q: What is the release date for the NVIDIA RTX A2000?

A: The release date is recorded as 2021-11-22. The Intel Arc A730M has no release date listed in the database.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Arc A730M as the stronger performer in the recorded benchmarks. It wins both shared tests, and its average score of 45,592 is 33.5% higher than the RTX A2000's 34,154. The 32.3% margin in 3DMark Steel Nomad is especially notable, suggesting that users who run DirectX 12 graphics workloads will see a clear benefit from the Intel part. The bandwidth advantage (336.0 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s) and the higher boost clock (2050 MHz versus 1200 MHz) support this interpretation.

The NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB, however, is not without merit in the data. Its 70 W TDP is lower, and it comes as a dual-slot card with a fixed 167 mm length and 69 mm height, making it easier to integrate into a workstation chassis. It also has 104 tensor cores, a feature absent from the Intel part, and its FP16 throughput is 1:1 rather than the 2:1 ratio used by the Arc A730M. For users who need tensor acceleration or a compact, low-power standalone card, the RTX A2000 has a role. But for raw graphics performance in the tests recorded, the Intel Arc A730M is the choice.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Arc A730M | NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB |

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

| Chip | DG2-512 | GA106 |

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Ampere |

| Generation | Alchemist (Arc 7 Mobile) | 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 | 1100 MHz | 562 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2050 MHz | 1200 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 336.0 GB/s | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3072 | 3328 |

| TMUs | 192 | 104 |

| ROPs | 96 | 48 |

| RT Cores | 24 | 26 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 104 |

| Pixel Rate | 196.8 GPixel/s | 57.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 393.6 GTexel/s | 124.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 12.60 TFLOPS | 7.987 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 25.19 TFLOPS (2:1) | 7.987 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 80 W | 70 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None listed | None |

| Suggested PSU | None listed | 250 W |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Dimensions | None listed | 167 mm (6.6 in) length, 69 mm (2.7 in) height |

| Release Date | None listed | 2021-11-22 |

| Predecessor | None listed | Quadro Turing |

| Successor | None listed | Workstation Ada |

| Launch MSRP | None listed | 449 USD |