Intel Arc A750 vs Intel Arc B580 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Arc B580, which wins 8 of the 10 head-to-head comparisons against the Intel Arc A750. The most significant margin appears in the Passmark DirectX 11 test, where the B580 scores 128 against the A750's 72, a 77.8% advantage. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison and indicates a substantial improvement in legacy DirectX 11 performance for the newer architecture.

In the Passmark GPU Compute test, the B580 continues its dominance with a score of 7,729 versus 5,368, a 44% lead. This suggests that the B580's compute throughput is considerably stronger, which matters for workloads that rely on general-purpose GPU processing rather than pure rasterization. The Geekbench Vulkan test also shows a major win for the B580, scoring 109,672 against 85,631, a 28.1% difference. This result is particularly relevant for modern cross-platform graphics APIs where Vulkan overhead and driver efficiency are critical.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, a demanding ray-tracing and DX12 workload, shows the B580 ahead with 3,068 points versus 2,612, a 17.5% improvement. The Passmark G3D test further reinforces the B580's lead, with 15,748 points against 12,534, a 25.6% advantage. Smaller wins for the B580 appear in Passmark DirectX 10 (76 vs 65, 16.9%), DirectX 12 (76 vs 70, 8.6%), and DirectX 9 (183 vs 181, 1.1%). The DirectX 9 result is nearly a tie, indicating that both cards handle this older API at a similar level.

The A750 manages to secure only two wins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the A750 scores 98,554 against the B580's 92,821, a 5.8% lead. This is notable because OpenCL often reflects compute-heavy tasks and can be sensitive to memory bandwidth and raw shader count. The other A750 win comes in Passmark G2D, where it scores 732 versus 709, a 3.1% margin. This 2D graphics test is typically less demanding and less indicative of gaming performance, but it does show the A750 is not without merit in certain workloads.

The overall average benchmark score for the B580 is 23,021, placing it at the 68th percentile among all GPUs. The A750 averages 20,582, sitting at the 66th percentile. The B580's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (average 23,061, delta -0.2%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (average 22,895, delta 0.6%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 (average 23,172, delta -0.7%), and the NVIDIA P106-100 (average 23,249, delta -1%). This places the B580 in a tightly contested performance band, with all deltas within 1% of its nearest competitors.

The A750's nearest rivals are the Intel Arc B570 (average 20,556, delta 0.1%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (average 20,534, delta 0.2%), the AMD Radeon R9 M390X (average 20,662, delta -0.4%), and the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (average 20,480, delta 0.5%). These deltas are also very small, confirming that the A750 sits in a competitive niche where small score differences matter.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins more benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Arc B580 wins 8 out of 10 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Arc A750 wins only 2.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest gap is in Passmark DirectX 11, where the B580 scores 128 versus the A750's 72, a 77.8% advantage.

Q: In which test does the A750 outperform the B580 by the largest margin?

A: The A750 leads in Geekbench OpenCL with 98,554 points versus 92,821, a 5.8% advantage.

Q: How do the two cards compare in ray-traced DX12 workloads?

A: In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the B580 scores 3,068 versus 2,612, putting it 17.5% ahead.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each card among all GPUs?

A: The B580 ranks at the 68th percentile, while the A750 ranks at the 66th percentile.

Q: Are there any tests where the cards are nearly tied?

A: Yes, in Passmark DirectX 9 the B580 scores 183 and the A750 scores 181, a 1.1% difference.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc B580 is built on the Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage generation (Arc 5), while the Intel Arc A750 uses the Xe-HPG architecture from the Alchemist generation (Arc 7). This generational shift is fundamental to understanding the benchmark results, as Xe2-HPG represents a substantial redesign. The B580's chip is designated BMG-G21, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, whereas the A750 uses the DG2-512 chip on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC.

Transistor counts and die sizes differ significantly between the two. The B580 has 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 72.1 million per square millimeter. The A750 has more transistors overall, 21,700 million, but on a much larger 406 mm² die, giving a lower density of 53.4 million per square millimeter. This density difference reflects the newer process node and more compact design of the B580, which achieves higher efficiency despite having fewer raw transistors.

The B580 features 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 80 raster operation units. The A750 has more of each: 3,584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. The A750 also has more ray tracing cores, 28 versus 20 for the B580. Despite this hardware disadvantage in raw counts, the B580 still wins most benchmarks, indicating that architectural efficiency and driver optimizations in Xe2-HPG more than compensate for the lower shader and TMU counts.

Clock speeds differ as well. The B580 has a base and boost clock of 2670 MHz, which is uniform with no separate game clock listed. The A750 has a base clock of 2050 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The B580's higher sustained clock rate helps it overcome the A750's larger compute resources in many tests.

Memory subsystems also diverge. The B580 uses 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 456.0 GB/s. The A750 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a wider 256-bit bus, achieving 512.0 GB/s. The A750 has higher memory bandwidth, but the B580 has more total memory capacity, which can be beneficial for larger textures and datasets.

Display outputs show a slight difference. The B580 has one HDMI 2.1a port and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The A750 has one HDMI 2.1 port and three DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature support is identical. The B580 uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the A750 uses the full PCIe 4.0 x16 interface.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in several key specification fields. The B580 has a base and boost clock of 2670 MHz, while the A750 operates at 2050 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost. Memory size is 12 GB for the B580 versus 8 GB for the A750, but the A750's memory bus is 256-bit compared to the B580's 192-bit, giving the A750 a bandwidth advantage (512.0 GB/s vs 456.0 GB/s). The B580's memory clock is 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective), while the A750's is 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective).

Shading unit counts differ, with the A750 having 3,584 versus 2,560 for the B580. TMUs and ROPs follow the same pattern: 224 vs 160 and 112 vs 80 respectively. Ray tracing cores are 28 on the A750 and 20 on the B580.

Power requirements are lower for the B580, with a TDP of 190 W and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The A750 has a TDP of 225 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W. Power connectors also differ: the B580 uses a single 8-pin connector, while the A750 requires one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector. Both are dual-slot cards.

The B580 measures 272 mm in length, 115 mm in height, and 45 mm in width. The A750's dimensions are not recorded in the database. The B580's production status is Active, while the A750 is listed as End-of-life. Release dates differ: the B580 launched on 2024-12-12, and the A750 on 2022-10-11. The B580's predecessor is listed as Alchemist, while the A750's predecessor is Xe Graphics and its successor is Battlemage.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc B580 is the clear winner for most modern gaming and compute workloads. Its 17.5% lead in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 makes it the better choice for ray-traced DirectX 12 titles, which are increasingly the standard for high-end gaming. The 28.1% advantage in Geekbench Vulkan further solidifies its position for Vulkan-based games and applications, which are common on Linux and in cross-platform engines. The 25.6% lead in Passmark G3D indicates superior overall 3D graphics performance, and the 44% margin in GPU compute makes it the better option for general-purpose compute tasks like physics simulations or data processing.

The B580's 77.8% win in DirectX 11 is particularly telling, as many popular games still use DX11. This suggests that the newer Xe2-HPG architecture has much better driver support for this legacy API, which can be a deciding factor for users with older game libraries. The smaller wins in DirectX 10 and DirectX 12 show consistent superiority across the DirectX stack.

The Intel Arc A750 wins in two specific areas. Its 5.8% lead in Geekbench OpenCL suggests it may be preferable for OpenCL-based compute workloads, which are common in certain scientific and professional applications. The 3.1% win in Passmark G2D indicates slightly better 2D rendering performance, though this is rarely a deciding factor for most users.

For users prioritizing modern gaming performance, especially with DX12 or Vulkan, the B580 is the stronger choice. Its higher memory capacity (12 GB vs 8 GB) also provides more headroom for high-resolution textures and larger game assets. The A750 retains relevance for OpenCL-heavy tasks and for users who require its wider 256-bit memory bus, which delivers higher raw bandwidth. However, the overall benchmark data shows the B580 as the more capable and future-proof card, particularly given its active production status compared to the A750's end-of-life designation. The B580's lower power draw (190 W vs 225 W) also makes it easier to integrate into systems with modest power supplies, further extending its practical appeal.