Intel Arc A770 vs NVIDIA RTX A4500 Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A4500 and Intel Arc A770 occupy overlapping performance territory in the database, but the recorded data shows they serve different intents: one is a workstation part built on a large Ampere die, the other a consumer Alchemist card that pushes higher clocks on a denser node. Across the three shared benchmarks in the database, the A4500 wins all three, yet the margins vary enough to make the comparison worth examining in detail. Both cards are now end-of-life, both sit in the 90th percentile band versus all GPUs, and both draw from a suggested 550 W power supply.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The cleanest picture comes from the aggregate: the A4500 carries an average benchmark score of 91671 against the A770's 68809, a gap of roughly a third in the workstation card's favor. But the three individual tests tell a more textured story.

In 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), the closest thing to a gaming workload in the shared set, the A4500 scores 3196 versus 2969, a 7.6 percent win. That is a real but modest margin, and it suggests the A770's high clock speeds keep it competitive in rasterization-heavy graphics workloads despite its smaller allocation of hardware.

Geekbench OpenCL widens the gap dramatically: 141837 for the A4500 versus 109175 for the A770, a 29.9 percent advantage. Geekbench Vulkan widens it further still, 129980 to 94284, a 37.9 percent margin. Compute throughput is where the A4500 pulls away, and the spec sheet explains why: 7168 shading units producing 23.65 TFLOPS FP32 against the A770's 4096 units and 19.66 TFLOPS. The A770 partially compensates in FP16 with a 2:1 rate delivering 39.32 TFLOPS, double its FP32 figure, whereas the A4500's FP16 runs at 1:1 for the same 23.65 TFLOPS. For half-precision-friendly workloads that trade-off narrows the gap considerably.

Context from each card's rival cluster reinforces the tier separation. The A4500 sits at the 93rd percentile versus all GPUs and trades blows with the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 (which beats it by 0.9 percent) and the Quadro GP100 (which it beats by 4.8 percent). The A770, at the 90th percentile, clusters tightly around the NVIDIA CMP 90HX (0.3 percent behind), the Radeon Instinct MI25 (0.4 percent ahead), and the Quadro P6000 (1.7 percent ahead). Three percentile points apart, but a 33 percent aggregate score difference, because percentile ranks compress differences near the top of the distribution.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins the most benchmarks in the database?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4500 wins all three shared tests: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 by 7.6 percent, Geekbench OpenCL by 29.9 percent, and Geekbench Vulkan by 37.9 percent. The Arc A770 wins none.

Q: How close is the A770 in gaming-oriented tests?

A: Closer than the aggregate suggests. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 the gap is only 7.6 percent, 2969 versus 3196. The large margins appear in the compute tests instead.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The A4500. Its 320-bit bus and GDDR6 memory deliver 640.0 GB/s, while the A770's 256-bit bus delivers 512.0 GB/s. Both run their memory at 16 Gbps effective.

Q: Which card is faster in half-precision compute?

A: The A770 on paper. Its FP16 rate of 39.32 TFLOPS is double its FP32 output thanks to a 2:1 ratio, while the A4500's FP16 equals its FP32 at 23.65 TFLOPS.

Q: What power supply does each card need?

A: Both cards carry the same 550 W suggested PSU rating, despite different board power profiles: the A4500 lists a 200 W TDP with a single 8-pin connector, while the A770 lists 225 W with one 6-pin plus one 8-pin.

Q: What did the Arc A770 cost at launch?

A: Its launch MSRP was 329 USD. No launch MSRP is recorded for the RTX A4500.

The Verdict

For compute-heavy workloads, the data points clearly to the A4500. Roughly 30 to 38 percent leads in OpenCL and Vulkan compute, backed by 224 tensor cores, 56 RT cores, and 20 GB of memory on a wider bus, make it the stronger professional card for GPU compute, rendering, and memory-bound tasks. Its position against the MI60 and its 93rd percentile rank confirm it as the higher-tier part in the database.

For graphics workloads where clocks and pixel throughput matter more, the case narrows. The 7.6 percent Steel Nomad gap is small, and the A770 actually posts higher theoretical rasterization rates: 307.2 GPixel/s versus 158.4, and 614.4 GTexel/s versus 369.6, thanks to its 128 ROPs against 96 and 256 TMUs against 224, all running at much higher clock speeds. The benchmark scores still favor the A4500, but the theoretical output figures show the A770 was engineered for high-frame-rate consumer rendering rather than sustained compute.

Practical notes from the recorded specs: the A4500 is the compact, simpler install at 267 mm long with a single 8-pin connector, while the A770 needs two connectors for its slightly higher TDP. Neither is in production anymore, both succeeded by newer generations, Workstation Ada for the A4500 and Battlemage for the A770.

Specification Differences

The two cards share PCIe 4.0 x16, dual-slot cooling, GDDR6 at 16 Gbps effective, DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4, and the same 550 W suggested PSU. They differ on nearly everything else.

Memory is the sharpest split: 20 GB on a 320-bit bus at 640.0 GB/s for the A4500, versus 16 GB on a 256-bit bus at 512.0 GB/s for the A770. The A4500 clocks far lower, 1050 MHz base and 1650 MHz boost against 2100 base and 2400 boost, but fields substantially more shading units, 7168 to 4096. TMUs favor the A770, 256 to 224, as do ROPs, 128 to 96. The A4500 carries 56 RT cores and 224 tensor cores; the A770 lists 32 RT cores and no discrete tensor cores in the database. Power delivery differs too: one 8-pin versus one 6-pin plus one 8-pin, with TDP at 200 W versus 225 W. Display outputs split by generation: four DisplayPort 1.4a on the A4500, one HDMI 2.1 plus three DisplayPort 2.0 on the A770. Physical dimensions are recorded only for the A4500, at 267 mm long and 112 mm tall.

Architecture Differences

These cards come from opposite design philosophies. The A4500 uses NVIDIA's GA102, an Ampere-generation workstation die manufactured by Samsung on an 8 nm process: 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, a density of 45.1M per mm². It succeeds the Quadro Turing line and precedes Workstation Ada.

The A770 uses Intel's DG2-512, an Alchemist Xe-HPG part built by TSMC on 6 nm: 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die, a density of 53.4M per mm². Its lineage runs from Xe Graphics to Battlemage.

The contrast is stark. The A4500's die is more than half again the area and holds about 30 percent more transistors, spread across more shaders, more RT hardware, and a large tensor core count, all running at conservative clocks. The A770 takes the opposite approach: a smaller, denser die pushed to much higher frequencies, with dedicated hardware weighted toward rasterization (more TMUs and ROPs) rather than the compute-oriented tensor resources the Ampere card prioritizes. Released almost a year apart, the A4500 in late 2021 and the A770 in late 2022, they represent big-silicon workstation engineering versus consumer-focused clock scaling, and the benchmark data reflects exactly that division.