Intel Arc A770M vs NVIDIA Tesla K80 Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla K80 and Intel Arc A770M represent two very different eras of GPU design, and the benchmark data reflects a complete generational shift. In the two shared tests, the Intel Arc A770M is decisively faster, but the Tesla K80’s strengths lie elsewhere—namely in its compute-oriented legacy and its standing relative to its own peers. The data shows a clear winner for raw performance, but the story is more nuanced when considering the specific workloads each card was built for.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two benchmarks shared by both cards are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the Intel Arc A770M wins both by a massive margin. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Arc A770M scores 89,494 compared to the Tesla K80’s 18,620. That is a delta of -79.2% from the K80’s perspective, meaning the Intel part is roughly 4.8 times faster in this compute-oriented test. The gap is slightly narrower but still overwhelming in Geekbench Vulkan, where the Arc A770M scores 74,422 against the K80’s 19,111, a -74.3% delta. These are not close contests; the Arc A770M delivers more than three times the Vulkan performance of the Tesla K80.

Looking at the broader benchmark picture, the Arc A770M has additional data points that the K80 lacks. Its Passmark G3D score is 11,774, and its Passmark GPU Compute score is 4,778. The Arc A770M also posts a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,278, which highlights its modern DirectX 12 Ultimate capabilities. The Tesla K80, by contrast, has no DirectX 12 benchmark results in the pack, and its API support is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1), a legacy feature level. While the head-to-head numbers are lopsided, the K80’s average benchmark score of 18,866 sits within 0.4% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (18,789) and 0.9% below the AMD Radeon RX 6600 (19,036). The Arc A770M’s average of 18,383 is just 0.1% above the AMD Radeon RX 460 (18,373) and 1.2% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile (18,159). In other words, despite the Arc A770M’s dominance in the shared tests, both cards land in the same percentile range—63rd for the K80 and 62nd for the Arc A770M—when compared against all GPUs.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K80 has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 18,866, compared to the Intel Arc A770M’s 18,383. The difference is about 2.6%, which is small in real-world terms.

Q: How much faster is the Intel Arc A770M in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The Arc A770M scores 74,422 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the Tesla K80 scores 19,111. This means the Arc A770M is approximately 3.9 times faster, with a delta of -74.3% from the K80’s perspective.

Q: Does the Tesla K80 have any benchmark where it beats the Arc A770M?

A: No. In the two head-to-head tests available—Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan—the Arc A770M wins both. The Tesla K80 has zero wins across the shared benchmarks.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two cards?

A: The Intel Arc A770M has a transistor density of 53.4M per mm², while the Tesla K80 has 12.7M per mm². This reflects the newer 6 nm process versus the older 28 nm node.

Q: Which card supports newer DirectX features?

A: The Intel Arc A770M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Tesla K80 only supports DirectX 12 (11_1). The Arc A770M also lists Vulkan 1.4 support, compared to Vulkan 1.2.175 on the K80.

Q: How do their percentile rankings compare?

A: The Tesla K80 is in the 63rd percentile of all GPUs, while the Arc A770M is in the 62nd percentile. Despite the Arc’s much higher raw scores in shared tests, the two are nearly equivalent in overall standing.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A770M wins every single benchmark that both cards share. In Geekbench OpenCL, its 89,494 score dwarfs the K80’s 18,620, making it the clear choice for compute-heavy OpenCL workloads. In Geekbench Vulkan, the 74,422 versus 19,111 result reinforces that the Arc A770M is the better option for modern graphics APIs and gaming-oriented tasks. The Arc A770M also brings a full suite of Passmark results—DirectX 9 through 12, G2D, G3D, and GPU Compute—which the K80 entirely lacks. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support and 32 ray tracing cores make it suitable for contemporary rendering pipelines, even if its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 178 and DirectX 10 score of 56 suggest older API performance is not its focus.

The Tesla K80 finds no wins in the head-to-head data, but its value lies in its relative standing among its peers. Its average benchmark score of 18,866 is within 0.4% of the GeForce RTX 2070 and 0.9% of the Quadro K6000. For legacy compute workloads that rely on Kepler architecture and CUDA, the K80 remains competitive with those older cards. Its 12 GB of GDDR5 memory and 240.6 GB/s bandwidth are modest by modern standards, but for specific scientific or enterprise tasks that were optimized for Kepler, the K80 can still hold its own. The Arc A770M, meanwhile, edges out the RTX 3060 Mobile by 1.2% in average score, showing that its performance profile is comparable to a mid-range mobile GPU from the same era.

Specification Differences

The specifications between these two cards could not be more different. The Tesla K80 uses a GK210 chip on a 28 nm process, while the Arc A770M uses a DG2-512 chip on a 6 nm process. The K80 has 7,100 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, whereas the Arc A770M packs 21,700 million transistors into a smaller 406 mm² die. This translates to a transistor density of 12.7M per mm² for the K80 versus 53.4M per mm² for the Arc A770M. Clock speeds tell a similar story: the K80 runs at a base of 562 MHz and boosts to 824 MHz, while the Arc A770M starts at 1650 MHz and boosts to 2050 MHz. Memory is also vastly different—the K80 offers 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 240.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Arc A770M has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

The compute units are equally lopsided. The Arc A770M has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, plus 32 ray tracing cores. The K80 has 2,496 shading units, 208 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores. Pixel and texture rates reflect this: the Arc A770M delivers 262.4 GPixel/s and 524.8 GTexel/s, while the K80 manages 42.85 GPixel/s and 171.4 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 16.79 TFLOPS on the Arc A770M versus 4.113 TFLOPS on the K80, and the Arc also supports FP16 at 33.59 TFLOPS (2:1), which the K80 does not list. Power draw is another major split—the K80 has a 300 W TDP and requires a 700 W power supply, while the Arc A770M is rated at just 120 W and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors or suggested PSU listed.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is fundamental. The Tesla K80 is built on NVIDIA’s Kepler 2.0 architecture, a design from the Tesla Kepler generation. It uses a 28 nm process from TSMC and has no ray tracing cores or tensor cores. Its API support caps at DirectX 12 (11_1), a legacy feature level that predates modern rendering techniques. The K80 is a dual-slot card with a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, and it has no display outputs, meaning it is purely a compute accelerator. Its memory clock is 1253 MHz, with 5 Gbps effective speed, which was typical for its time.

The Intel Arc A770M, on the other hand, uses the Xe-HPG architecture from the Alchemist generation (Arc 7 Mobile). It is built on a 6 nm TSMC process, which explains the dramatically higher transistor density. The Arc A770M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and includes 32 dedicated ray tracing cores. It has a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface and its display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its mobile, integrated nature. The memory clock is 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed. The K80’s architecture is end-of-life and has a clear predecessor (Tesla Fermi) and successor (Tesla Maxwell), while the Arc A770M has no predecessor or successor listed, marking it as a standalone entry in Intel’s discrete GPU push.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Arc A770M is the superior performer in every shared benchmark. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 79.2% higher, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 74.3% higher than the Tesla K80. For anyone choosing between these two for modern compute or graphics workloads, the Arc A770M is the only rational pick. It offers higher clock speeds, more memory bandwidth, newer API support, ray tracing hardware, and significantly lower power consumption at 120 W versus 300 W.

The Tesla K80 is not without merit, but its merits are historical. Its average benchmark score of 18,866 places it in the same league as the GeForce RTX 2070 and Quadro K6000, meaning it remains a viable option for legacy Kepler-optimized workloads. Its 12 GB of memory and 384-bit bus provide decent bandwidth for its era, and its 63rd percentile ranking is nearly identical to the Arc A770M’s 62nd. However, the K80’s lack of display outputs, absence of ray tracing, and outdated DirectX 12 (11_1) support make it unsuitable for any modern gaming or interactive application. If the workload is strictly compute-bound and built around Kepler’s feature set, the K80 can still function, but the Arc A770M is the better choice for virtually any current task—especially given its 16.79 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The verdict is simple: pick the Arc A770M for performance and longevity, and only consider the Tesla K80 if you are locked into legacy CUDA/Kepler software.