Intel Arc A730M vs NVIDIA RTX A6000 Comparison

Intel Arc A730M vs NVIDIA RTX A6000: two end-of-life GPUs that occupy entirely different worlds, yet their aggregate benchmark percentiles both land at the 84th percentile. The data reveals a stark performance hierarchy, but also significant architectural divergence. The RTX A6000 wins both head-to-head tests decisively, while the Arc A730M offers a unique feature set in a mobile form factor. The following analysis breaks down exactly what the numbers say and what they mean for potential workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison is brief but unambiguous: the NVIDIA RTX A6000 dominates both shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A6000 scores 193,937 against the Arc A730M’s 70,352, a delta of -63.7% for the Intel part. That is a massive gap—the NVIDIA GPU delivers nearly 2.75 times the raw compute performance in this API. The Geekbench Vulkan result tells a similar story: 164,462 for the RTX A6000 versus 64,693 for the Arc A730M, with a -60.7% delta. The Arc A730M does not win a single head-to-head test, and the margin is consistent across both APIs, suggesting the performance difference is fundamental rather than workload-specific.

The RTX A6000’s aggregate average benchmark score of 44,075 further underscores its position, though the Arc A730M’s average of 45,592 is actually higher in the aggregate database. This is a curious inversion: the Arc A730M posts a higher average across its three benchmarks (Geekbench OpenCL, Geekbench Vulkan, and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12) than the RTX A6000 does across its nine benchmarks, yet loses the shared tests by over 60%. This implies the Arc A730M’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1,732 is relatively strong compared to the RTX A6000’s older Passmark DirectX scores, which include low figures like 87 for DirectX 12 and 155 for DirectX 10. The RTX A6000’s Passmark G3D score of 22,577 and G2D score of 913 are respectable, but its DirectX 9 (245) and DirectX 11 (191) scores drag down its average.

Looking at nearest rivals, the RTX A6000 sits within 1.9% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile (43,268) and 1.8% of the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 (43,301), while being 0.9% ahead of the RTX 4090 Mobile (43,667). The Arc A730M, by contrast, is 1% ahead of the RTX 5090 Mobile (45,152) and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT (45,384). Both cards cluster near the same average performance tier, yet the head-to-head tests show the RTX A6000 is in a different league for compute-heavy APIs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only two benchmarks they share?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A6000 wins both. In Geekbench OpenCL it scores 193,937 versus 70,352 for the Arc A730M, and in Geekbench Vulkan it scores 164,462 versus 64,693. The deltas are -63.7% and -60.7% respectively.

Q: Why does the Arc A730M have a higher average benchmark score than the RTX A6000?

A: The Arc A730M’s average is 45,592 across three tests, while the RTX A6000’s is 44,075 across nine. The RTX A6000’s Passmark DirectX 9 (245), DX10 (155), DX11 (191), and DX12 (87) scores are extremely low, pulling its average down despite strong Geekbench results.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RTX A6000 has 48 GB of GDDR6 memory, which is four times the Arc A730M’s 12 GB. The RTX A6000 also has a 384-bit bus and 768.0 GB/s bandwidth, versus the Arc A730M’s 192-bit bus and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their transistor counts and die sizes compare?

A: The RTX A6000 uses 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die (Samsung 8 nm), while the Arc A730M uses 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die (TSMC 6 nm). Despite fewer transistors, the Arc A730M has a higher transistor density at 53.4M/mm² versus 45.1M/mm².

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life. The RTX A6000 was released on 2020-10-04, while the Arc A730M has no listed release date.

Q: What are their power and form factor differences?

A: The Arc A730M has a TDP of 80 W and an IGP (integrated) slot width, meaning it is mobile-oriented. The RTX A6000 has a 300 W TDP, is dual-slot, requires an 8-pin EPS power connector, and a 700 W suggested PSU.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm is wide. The Intel Arc A730M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-512 chip, fabricated on TSMC’s 6 nm process. It packs 21,700 million transistors into a 406 mm² die, yielding a density of 53.4M/mm². The NVIDIA RTX A6000 uses the Ampere architecture with the GA102 chip, built on Samsung’s 8 nm process, with 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die and a density of 45.1M/mm². The newer, denser process gives Intel an efficiency edge per square millimeter, but raw transistor count favors NVIDIA.

Compute resources are wildly different. The RTX A6000 has 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, versus the Arc A730M’s 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The RTX A6000 also has 84 ray tracing cores and 336 tensor cores, while the Arc A730M has 24 ray tracing cores and no listed tensor cores. This translates to 38.71 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 (1:1) for the RTX A6000, versus 12.60 TFLOPS FP32 and 25.19 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) for the Arc A730M. The RTX A6000’s FP16 performance matches FP32, while the Arc A730M halves FP16 throughput—a critical difference for AI workloads.

Memory subsystems diverge sharply: the RTX A6000 offers 48 GB GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 768.0 GB/s bandwidth, clocked at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The Arc A730M has 12 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 336.0 GB/s, clocked at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). Pixel and texture rates reflect these differences: 201.6 GPixel/s and 604.8 GTexel/s for NVIDIA, versus 196.8 GPixel/s and 393.6 GTexel/s for Intel. The RTX A6000’s pixel rate is only slightly higher, but its texture rate is over 50% faster.

Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and both use PCIe 4.0 x16. However, the RTX A6000 has fixed display outputs (4x DisplayPort 1.4a) and a 267 mm length, while the Arc A730M’s outputs are "Portable Device Dependent" and it has no listed dimensions. The RTX A6000 also has a 300 W TDP and is dual-slot, while the Arc A730M’s 80 W TDP and IGP slot width point to laptop integration.

The Verdict

The data is unequivocal for raw compute: the NVIDIA RTX A6000 is the far more powerful GPU. In the two shared benchmarks, it leads by over 60% in both OpenCL and Vulkan. Its 38.71 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 performance, 84 RT cores, and 336 tensor cores make it a workstation-class monster. The 48 GB memory capacity and 768.0 GB/s bandwidth are industry-leading figures that dwarf the Arc A730M’s 12 GB and 336.0 GB/s. For anyone needing maximum compute, ray tracing, or large-memory workloads, the RTX A6000 is the obvious choice from this data.

However, the Arc A730M is not without merit. Its 84th percentile ranking matches the RTX A6000, and its aggregate average score is actually higher (45,592 vs 44,075). Its 6 nm process yields better transistor density, and its 80 W TDP is a fraction of the RTX A6000’s 300 W. The mobile form factor (IGP slot width) makes it suitable for laptops, where the RTX A6000’s dual-slot, 267 mm length and 700 W PSU requirement are non-starters. The Arc A730M also has a higher Vulkan score relative to its OpenCL score than the RTX A6000, suggesting better API efficiency in some contexts.

The verdict hinges on use case. The RTX A6000 wins decisively on performance and memory, with a launch MSRP of 4,649 USD. The Arc A730M wins on efficiency and portability. Neither is a general-purpose winner; the data shows a clear trade-off between raw power and practical deployment.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc A730M | NVIDIA RTX A6000 |

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

| Chip | DG2-512 | GA102 |

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Ampere |

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

| Transistors | 21,700 million | 28,300 million |

| Die Size | 406 mm² | 628 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 53.4M / mm² | 45.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1100 MHz | 1410 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2050 MHz | 1800 MHz |

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

| Memory Size | 12 GB GDDR6 | 48 GB GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 336.0 GB/s | 768.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3072 | 10752 |

| TMUs | 192 | 336 |

| ROPs | 96 | 112 |

| RT Cores | 24 | 84 |

| Tensor Cores | None listed | 336 |

| Pixel Rate | 196.8 GPixel/s | 201.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 393.6 GTexel/s | 604.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 12.60 TFLOPS | 38.71 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 25.19 TFLOPS (2:1) | 38.71 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 80 W | 300 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None listed | 8-pin EPS |

| Suggested PSU | None listed | 700 W |

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

| Dimensions | None listed | 267 mm x 112 mm |

| Release Date | None listed | 2020-10-04 |

| Launch MSRP | None listed | 4,649 USD |

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA RTX A6000 wins on:

• Compute performance: 38.71 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 is over 3x the Arc A730M’s FP32 rate and 1.5x its FP16 rate.
• Memory: 48 GB capacity and 768.0 GB/s bandwidth enable massive datasets and high-resolution textures that the 12 GB Arc A730M cannot handle.
• Ray tracing and tensor workloads: 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores versus 24 RT cores and none listed.
• Texture throughput: 604.8 GTexel/s versus 393.6 GTexel/s.
• Geekbench scores: 193,937 OpenCL and 164,462 Vulkan, both over 2.5x the Arc A730M’s results.
• Fixed display outputs with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a for multi-monitor workstation setups.

Intel Arc A730M wins on:

• Efficiency: 80 W TDP versus 300 W, making it deployable in thin-and-light laptops.
• Transistor density: 53.4M/mm² versus 45.1M/mm², showing superior process utilization.
• Aggregate average score: 45,592 versus 44,075, driven by its strong 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 1,732.
• Form factor: IGP slot width versus dual-slot, requiring no external power connector.
• Higher boost-to-base clock ratio: 2050 MHz boost from 1100 MHz base (86% uplift) versus 1800 MHz from 1410 MHz (28% uplift), indicating better frequency scaling headroom.