Intel Arc A770 vs NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal Comparison

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal has a higher average benchmark score of 72,098, placing it in the 91st percentile of all GPUs. The Intel Arc A770 scores 68,809 on average, falling just behind in the 90th percentile. The performance gap between them is narrow, with the TITAN X Pascal sitting roughly 4.8% higher than the Arc A770 based on their average scores.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Geekbench OpenCL performance?

A: The Intel Arc A770 dominates in Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 109,175 against the TITAN X Pascal's 66,696. That represents a 38.9% advantage for the Intel card in this workload. This is a substantial lead and indicates the Arc A770 handles compute-heavy OpenCL tasks far more effectively than the older Pascal architecture.

Q: What about Vulkan performance?

A: The Arc A770 also wins in Geekbench Vulkan, posting a score of 94,284 versus the TITAN X Pascal's 77,499. The delta is 17.8% in Intel's favor. While not as dramatic as the OpenCL gap, it still shows consistent superiority for the Arc A770 across both API-level synthetic benchmarks.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each card according to the benchmark data?

A: The TITAN X Pascal's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64, which scores 72,379 and trails by just 0.4%. The Intel Arc A770's closest competitor is the NVIDIA CMP 90HX, which scores 69,000 and is 0.3% behind. Both cards sit in a competitive field where the top rivals are within 2% of their average scores.

Q: Which card has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The Intel Arc A770 packs 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The TITAN X Pascal has 12 GB of GDDR5X on a wider 384-bit bus, achieving 480.4 GB/s. Despite the narrower bus, the Arc A770's higher effective memory clock of 16 Gbps gives it the bandwidth edge.

Q: What are the launch prices of these cards?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal had a launch MSRP of 1,199 USD. The Intel Arc A770 launched with an MSRP of 329 USD. This is a significant difference in initial pricing, though it does not reflect current market conditions as both cards are end-of-life products.

# The Verdict

The benchmark data delivers a clear verdict: the Intel Arc A770 wins both head-to-head tests decisively. It outperforms the TITAN X Pascal by 38.9% in Geekbench OpenCL and by 17.8% in Geekbench Vulkan. If the choice is purely about raw synthetic benchmark performance, the Arc A770 is the stronger card.

However, the TITAN X Pascal is not without merit. Its average benchmark score of 72,098 edges out the Arc A770's 68,809, and it holds a higher percentile ranking at 91 versus 90. This suggests that while the Arc A770 excels in the specific OpenCL and Vulkan tests, the TITAN X Pascal may perform better across a broader range of benchmark scenarios not captured in this head-to-head data.

For users prioritizing compute workloads that leverage OpenCL or Vulkan, the Arc A770 is the obvious pick. Its 4096 shading units, 32 ray tracing cores, and 19.66 TFLOPS of FP32 performance give it a structural advantage in modern API-heavy applications. The 16 GB memory capacity also provides more headroom for large datasets.

The TITAN X Pascal, with its 3584 shading units and 10.97 TFLOPS FP32, remains competitive in legacy or OpenGL-centric workloads. Its higher average benchmark score and tight rival margins (0.4% behind the Radeon Pro Vega 64) indicate it still holds up well in general-purpose tasks.

In short: choose the Arc A770 for modern API performance and memory capacity. Choose the TITAN X Pascal if you value the higher overall average score and are working in environments where its Pascal architecture is better optimized.

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two shared benchmark tests tell a one-sided story. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Intel Arc A770 scores 109,175, while the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal manages only 66,696. That is a 38.9% deficit for the Pascal card — a massive gap that highlights how far Intel's Xe-HPG architecture has come in compute efficiency.

The Vulkan test narrows the margin but still favors Intel. The Arc A770 scores 94,284 versus 77,499 for the TITAN X Pascal, a 17.8% lead. This smaller delta suggests that the Pascal architecture is relatively stronger in Vulkan than in OpenCL, but it still cannot overcome the Arc A770's raw throughput advantages.

The TITAN X Pascal has zero wins in the head-to-head comparison. Every shared benchmark goes to Intel. Yet the average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story: the TITAN X Pascal's 72,098 average is 4.8% higher than the Arc A770's 68,809. This discrepancy implies that the TITAN X Pascal may excel in other benchmark suites not included in this head-to-head, or that its performance is more consistent across diverse workloads.

The Arc A770's nearest rival, the NVIDIA CMP 90HX, scores 69,000 — just 0.3% ahead of the Arc A770. The TITAN X Pascal's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64, scores 72,379, which is 0.4% behind the TITAN. Both cards are tightly clustered with their competitors, but the head-to-head data shows Intel with a decisive edge in the tests that matter most for modern API adoption.

# Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ substantially in nearly every technical specification. The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal uses the GP102 chip on a 16 nm TSMC process, while the Intel Arc A770 uses the DG2-512 chip on a 6 nm TSMC node. The process shrink gives Intel a significant density advantage: 53.4M transistors per mm² versus 25.1M for NVIDIA.

Transistor counts also diverge sharply. The Arc A770 packs 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die, while the TITAN X Pascal has 11,800 million on a larger 471 mm² die. This means Intel fits nearly twice the transistors in a physically smaller package.

Clock speeds favor Intel as well. The Arc A770 runs at 2100 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, compared to 1417 MHz base and 1531 MHz boost for the TITAN X Pascal. Memory clocks differ: the Arc A770 uses 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) GDDR6, while the TITAN X Pascal uses 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective) GDDR5X.

Memory configuration diverges: the Arc A770 has 16 GB on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the TITAN X Pascal has 12 GB on a 384-bit bus with 480.4 GB/s. The compute units also differ: the Arc A770 has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, versus 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs for the TITAN X Pascal.

The Arc A770 includes 32 ray tracing cores; the TITAN X Pascal has none. Pixel rate and texture rate heavily favor Intel: 307.2 GPixel/s and 614.4 GTexel/s versus 147.0 GPixel/s and 342.9 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 19.66 TFLOPS for Intel against 10.97 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16 shows an even greater disparity: 39.32 TFLOPS for the Arc A770 versus 171.5 GFLOPS for the TITAN X Pascal.

Power draw differs: the Arc A770 has a 225 W TDP with a 550 W suggested PSU, while the TITAN X Pascal has a 250 W TDP with a 600 W suggested PSU. Both use dual-slot coolers and 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connectors. The bus interface differs: PCIe 4.0 x16 for Intel versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for NVIDIA.

Display outputs vary: the Arc A770 offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 2.0, while the TITAN X Pascal has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. DirectX support also differs: the Arc A770 supports 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the TITAN X Pascal supports 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

# Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these cards is generational. The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal is built on the Pascal architecture, a design from the GeForce 10 generation. It uses the GP102 chip and represents a mature, proven design from 2016. The Intel Arc A770, by contrast, uses the Xe-HPG architecture from the Alchemist generation (Arc 7), released in 2022.

Process technology separates them fundamentally. The TITAN X Pascal uses TSMC's 16 nm node, while the Arc A770 uses TSMC's 6 nm node. This allows Intel to achieve a transistor density of 53.4M per mm², more than double the 25.1M per mm² of the Pascal chip. The architectural leap is evident in the FP16 capabilities: the TITAN X Pascal manages only 171.5 GFLOPS FP16 (a 1:64 ratio), while the Arc A770 achieves 39.32 TFLOPS FP16 (a 2:1 ratio). This makes the Arc A770 vastly superior for workloads that leverage half-precision arithmetic.

Ray tracing is a major architectural differentiator. The Arc A770 includes 32 dedicated ray tracing cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing. The TITAN X Pascal has no ray tracing cores at all, meaning it must rely on compute shaders for any ray tracing effects — a far less efficient approach.

The memory subsystems reflect different design philosophies. The TITAN X Pascal uses a wide 384-bit bus with slower GDDR5X, while the Arc A770 uses a narrower 256-bit bus with faster GDDR6. The result is that Intel achieves higher bandwidth (512.0 GB/s versus 480.4 GB/s) despite the narrower interface, thanks to the higher memory clock.

The TITAN X Pascal's predecessor is the GeForce 900 series, and its successor is the GeForce 20 series. The Arc A770's predecessor is Xe Graphics, and its successor is Battlemage. These lineage differences underscore that the TITAN X Pascal is an end-of-life product from an older era, while the Arc A770, though also end-of-life, represents a more recent design with modern feature support.

# Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A770 wins decisively in the shared benchmarks. It leads by 38.9% in Geekbench OpenCL and by 17.8% in Geekbench Vulkan. This makes it the clear choice for applications that rely heavily on these APIs, such as OpenCL-based compute tasks, Vulkan-enabled games, and modern graphics workloads. Its 32 ray tracing cores also give it a definitive edge in ray-traced content, which the TITAN X Pascal cannot hardware-accelerate.

The Arc A770's 16 GB memory capacity and higher bandwidth (512.0 GB/s) make it better suited for large datasets, high-resolution textures, and memory-intensive workloads. Its 19.66 TFLOPS FP32 and 39.32 TFLOPS FP16 performance provide more than double the compute throughput of the TITAN X Pascal in both precision formats. The 2400 MHz boost clock and 307.2 GPixel/s pixel rate further cement its advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios.

The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal, despite losing both head-to-head tests, holds a higher average benchmark score of 72,098 across all recorded benchmarks. This suggests it may win in benchmark suites not covered by the head-to-head data. Its 91st percentile ranking versus the Arc A770's 90th indicates slightly broader overall competitiveness.

The TITAN X Pascal also has the advantage of a wider 384-bit memory bus, which can be beneficial in certain access patterns despite the lower overall bandwidth. Its 12 GB GDDR5X memory, while smaller in capacity, still provides substantial bandwidth at 480.4 GB/s. The card's 96 ROPs and 224 TMUs, while lower than Intel's counts, are not trivial.

For users working in legacy OpenGL or DirectX 12 (12_1) environments, the TITAN X Pascal's mature Pascal drivers may offer better compatibility. Its lower transistor count (11,800 million) and simpler architecture could also mean fewer driver-level quirks in older software. The card's 471 mm² die size and 16 nm process, while dated, represent a well-understood design.

In summary: the Arc A770 wins where modern APIs, compute performance, and memory capacity matter. The TITAN X Pascal wins where overall benchmark diversity and legacy compatibility are priorities. The data is clear — Intel leads in the head-to-head, but NVIDIA's older card remains competitive in the broader benchmark landscape.