Intel Arc A770 vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data provides two direct comparisons between the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation and the Intel Arc A770, both in Geekbench compute workloads. In the OpenCL test, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada scored 124,812 against the Arc A770's 109,175, a difference of 14.3% in favor of the NVIDIA card. The Vulkan test shows a similar pattern: the RTX 4000 SFF Ada reached 109,364 while the Arc A770 managed 94,284, a 16% margin for the NVIDIA part. Across the two head-to-head benchmarks, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada wins both, giving it a clean 2-0 record.

The average benchmark score tells a more dramatic story. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada posts an average of 117,088 across its recorded tests, while the Arc A770 averages 68,809. That is a substantial gap, but it is important to note that the averages are not computed from identical test suites. The NVIDIA card has two Geekbench entries, while the Intel card includes a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result alongside its two Geekbench runs. The 3DMark score of 2,969 drags the Intel average down considerably, so the average comparison should be read with that caveat in mind.

Looking at percentile placement, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada sits in the 95th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the Arc A770 lands in the 90th percentile. The nearest rivals for each card reinforce their respective tiers. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada is essentially level with the NVIDIA GB10 (0.3% behind), slightly behind the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 (1.6% behind), and ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (2.4% ahead) and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (2.8% ahead). The Arc A770, by contrast, trades blows with the NVIDIA CMP 90HX (0.3% behind), the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 (0.4% ahead), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 (1.5% behind), and the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 (1.7% behind). The RTX 4000 SFF Ada competes in a higher performance class entirely.

Within the two shared tests, the NVIDIA card's lead is consistent but not overwhelming. A 14.3% advantage in OpenCL and a 16% advantage in Vulkan suggest a real performance gap, but not one that would embarrass the Intel card in every workload. The Arc A770's higher raw FP32 throughput, 19.66 TFLOPS versus 19.17 TFLOPS, hints that the Intel card can keep pace in certain compute scenarios, even if the Geekbench results do not show it.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner in raw benchmark performance: the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation. It wins both head-to-head tests, holds a higher average benchmark score, and ranks in the 95th percentile versus the Arc A770's 90th. For anyone prioritizing compute performance as measured by Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, the NVIDIA card is the safer choice.

But the verdict is not purely about scoreboards. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada is a 70 W dual-slot card with no power connectors and a suggested 250 W power supply. The Arc A770 is a 225 W dual-slot card requiring a 6-pin and 8-pin connector and a suggested 550 W power supply. That is a 155 W difference in TDP and a 300 W difference in suggested PSU. The NVIDIA card achieves its higher benchmark scores at a fraction of the power budget. For compact workstations or systems with limited power delivery, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada is the only viable option between the two.

The Arc A770 does have one clear advantage in the specification sheet: memory bandwidth. Its 512.0 GB/s over a 256-bit bus dwarfs the RTX 4000 SFF Ada's 280.0 GB/s over a 160-bit bus. The Intel card also has more TMUs (256 versus 192), more ROPs (128 versus 64), and a higher pixel rate (307.2 GPixel/s versus 99.84 GPixel/s) and texture rate (614.4 GTexel/s versus 299.5 GTexel/s). These are real strengths in rasterization-heavy work, even if they do not show up in the compute-oriented benchmarks recorded here.

The production statuses differ sharply. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada is listed as Active, while the Arc A770 is End-of-life. The NVIDIA card was released in March 2023, the Intel card in October 2022. The Intel card's successor is Battlemage, while the NVIDIA card's successor is Blackwell PRO W. For long-term procurement, the Active status of the NVIDIA card matters.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses the AD104 chip built on Ada Lovelace architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 5 nm process. The Intel Arc A770 uses the DG2-512 chip on Xe-HPG architecture, also from TSMC but on a 6 nm node. The process advantage belongs to NVIDIA: 5 nm versus 6 nm.

Transistor counts reflect the design divergence. The AD104 packs 35,800 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, yielding a density of 121.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The DG2-512 contains 21,700 million transistors on a larger 406 mm² die, for a density of just 53.4 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip is more than twice as dense, which explains how it fits more transistors into a smaller area.

Shader resources tell a mixed story. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores. The Arc A770 has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 32 RT cores, with no tensor core count listed. The NVIDIA card has 50% more shading units and 50% more RT cores, while the Intel card has 33% more TMUs and double the ROPs. The FP32 compute figures are nearly identical: 19.17 TFLOPS for NVIDIA versus 19.66 TFLOPS for Intel. The FP16 numbers diverge sharply: the RTX 4000 SFF Ada delivers 19.17 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the Arc A770 delivers 39.32 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, giving Intel a 2x advantage in half-precision throughput.

The clock speeds are a study in contrast. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada has a base clock of 720 MHz and a boost of 1560 MHz. The Arc A770 runs at 2100 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost. The Intel card's clocks are nearly 1.5x higher at base and about 1.5x higher at boost, yet it still loses the Geekbench compute tests. This suggests the NVIDIA architecture achieves more work per clock, or the power constraints of the 70 W card are offset by other efficiencies.

Memory architecture differs in capacity and bandwidth. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada offers 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus at 280.0 GB/s. The Arc A770 offers 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus at 512.0 GB/s. The Intel card has 83% more bandwidth, but the NVIDIA card has 25% more capacity. Effective memory speed is 14 Gbps for NVIDIA and 16 Gbps for Intel.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every measurable specification. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada runs on a 5 nm TSMC process; the Arc A770 uses 6 nm TSMC. Transistor counts are 35,800 million versus 21,700 million. Die size is 294 mm² versus 406 mm². Transistor density is 121.8 million per mm² versus 53.4 million per mm².

Clock speeds: the NVIDIA card runs at 720 MHz base and 1560 MHz boost; the Intel card runs at 2100 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost. Memory speed is 14 Gbps effective for NVIDIA and 16 Gbps effective for Intel. Memory size is 20 GB versus 16 GB. Bus width is 160-bit versus 256-bit. Bandwidth is 280.0 GB/s versus 512.0 GB/s.

Compute resources: shading units are 6,144 versus 4,096. TMUs are 192 versus 256. ROPs are 64 versus 128. RT cores are 48 versus 32. Tensor cores are 192 for NVIDIA, with no listing for Intel. Pixel rate is 99.84 GPixel/s versus 307.2 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 299.5 GTexel/s versus 614.4 GTexel/s. FP32 is 19.17 TFLOPS versus 19.66 TFLOPS. FP16 is 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 39.32 TFLOPS (2:1).

Power and physical specs: TDP is 70 W versus 225 W. The NVIDIA card uses no power connectors; the Intel card requires one 6-pin and one 8-pin. Suggested PSU is 250 W versus 550 W. Both are dual-slot. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada is 168 mm long and 69 mm high; the Arc A770 has no listed dimensions. The NVIDIA card has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs; the Intel card has one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 2.0 outputs.

Bus interface and APIs are identical: both use PCIe 4.0 x16, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Release dates differ: March 2023 for NVIDIA, October 2022 for Intel. The NVIDIA card is Active; the Intel card is End-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation scores 124,812 compared to the Intel Arc A770's 109,175, a 14.3% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each card have?

A: The Intel Arc A770 has 512.0 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada has 280.0 GB/s over a 160-bit bus. Intel leads by 83%.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The NVIDIA card has a 70 W TDP with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU. The Intel card has a 225 W TDP, requires a 6-pin and 8-pin connector, and needs a 550 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card has more memory capacity?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada has 20 GB of GDDR6, while the Intel Arc A770 has 16 GB of GDDR6. NVIDIA leads by 4 GB.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada is listed as Active, while the Intel Arc A770 is End-of-life.

Q: What is the FP16 performance comparison?

A: The Intel Arc A770 delivers 39.32 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, exactly double the NVIDIA card's 19.17 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio.

Q: How do the cards compare in Vulkan compute?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada scores 109,364 versus the Arc A770's 94,284, a 16% margin for NVIDIA.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins in compute benchmarks, efficiency, and memory capacity. Its two head-to-head victories in OpenCL and Vulkan are backed by a 95th percentile ranking and an average score of 117,088. The 70 W power envelope with no external connectors makes it suitable for systems where power delivery is constrained. The 20 GB memory capacity is 25% larger than the Intel card's, which matters for workloads with large working sets. The 5 nm process and 121.8 million transistors per square millimeter density give it a clear architectural efficiency lead. Its Active production status ensures ongoing availability.

The Intel Arc A770 wins in raw throughput metrics that the head-to-head tests do not capture. Its 512.0 GB/s bandwidth is 83% higher, and its 256-bit bus is 60% wider. The 2:1 FP16 ratio delivers 39.32 TFLOPS, double the NVIDIA card's half-precision throughput. The pixel rate of 307.2 GPixel/s is over 3x the NVIDIA card's 99.84 GPixel/s, and the texture rate of 614.4 GTexel/s is more than double the 299.5 GTexel/s. The higher clock speeds, 2100 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, suggest strong rasterization potential. The display output flexibility is also notable: the Arc A770 offers HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 2.0 ports, while the NVIDIA card has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

The choice depends on workload priorities. Compute performance and power efficiency point to NVIDIA. Memory bandwidth, half-precision throughput, and rasterization rates point to Intel. The database records only two shared benchmark tests, both favoring NVIDIA, but the specification gaps in bandwidth and pixel throughput leave room for the Arc A770 to excel in scenarios not covered by Geekbench. The 16% Vulkan delta and 14.3% OpenCL delta are meaningful, yet the Intel card's 2x FP16 advantage and superior memory subsystem suggest it could win in AI inference or high-bandwidth tasks. Ultimately, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada is the stronger all-around card according to recorded data, but the Arc A770 has specific hardware strengths that the current benchmark suite does not fully exercise.