Intel Arc Pro A30M vs NVIDIA GeForce MX550 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly recorded head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL, and the Intel Arc Pro A30M takes a decisive victory. Intel scores 31,894 against NVIDIA's 20,372, a margin of 56.6%. That is not a narrow lead; it is a substantial gap that places the two chips in different performance tiers despite both being mobile-oriented solutions.

Looking at the broader database context, the Intel Arc Pro A30M sits at the 76th percentile of all GPUs, while the GeForce MX550 sits at the 72nd percentile. Those percentile figures look close at a glance, but the average benchmark score tells a different story. Intel's average is 31,894, while NVIDIA's average is 26,421, a difference of roughly 5,473 points. The MX550's average is pulled upward by its Vulkan result of 32,469, which actually exceeds its OpenCL score. This Vulkan advantage suggests the NVIDIA part can perform better under certain API loads, but the database only records one head-to-head test, and that test favors Intel heavily.

The nearest rival data reinforces the interpretation. The Arc Pro A30M's closest competitors include the NVIDIA TITAN RTX at 31,676 (0.7% behind Intel), the AMD Radeon Pro 570X at 32,176 (0.9% ahead of Intel), and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell at 31,532 (1.1% behind Intel). This places the Intel part in the company of much larger, higher-power desktop workstation cards. The MX550, by contrast, competes with integrated graphics and mid-range parts: the AMD Radeon 860M at 26,401 (0.1% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 at 26,331 (0.3% ahead), and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary at 26,553 (0.5% behind). The MX550's performance neighborhood is populated by chips with far lower power envelopes, which makes its 25 W power draw look efficient, but it cannot match the raw compute output of the Intel part.

The wins tally is one for Intel, zero for NVIDIA. That is the recorded data, and it is unambiguous. The OpenCL result alone does not capture every workload, but for the one metric where both chips were measured under identical conditions, Intel wins by a wide margin.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. Intel's Arc Pro A30M uses the DG2-128 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist generation for professional mobile SKUs. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. NVIDIA's GeForce MX550 uses the TU117SB chip on the Turing architecture, part of the GeForce MX 5xx generation, and it is built on a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. The node difference is significant: 6 nm versus 12 nm means Intel packs transistors more densely, and the numbers confirm it. Intel's die contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a density of 45.9 million transistors per square millimeter. NVIDIA's die contains 4,700 million transistors on a larger 200 mm² die, yielding only 23.5 million per square millimeter.

Transistor count alone does not decide performance, but it does indicate architectural complexity. Intel fields 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. NVIDIA also fields 1,024 shading units, but only 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs. The TMU and ROP disparity explains part of the compute gap: Intel can texture and rasterize at more than double the rate. Intel's pixel rate is 64.00 GPixel/s versus NVIDIA's 21.12 GPixel/s, and Intel's texture rate is 128.0 GTexel/s versus NVIDIA's 42.24 GTexel/s.

Ray tracing is another differentiator. Intel includes 8 dedicated ray tracing cores; NVIDIA's TU117SB has none. That means the Arc Pro A30M supports hardware-accelerated ray tracing workloads while the MX550 does not, a relevant consideration for any professional rendering task that touches RT acceleration.

Memory configurations also diverge. Intel uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth. NVIDIA uses 2 GB of GDDR6 on the same 64-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s. Intel has double the capacity and a 33% bandwidth advantage. Clock behavior differs as well. Intel runs at a 1500 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost, with memory at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). NVIDIA runs at a 1065 MHz base and 1320 MHz boost, with memory at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). Intel's higher clocks compound its architectural advantages.

FP32 compute tells the performance story cleanly. Intel delivers 4.096 TFLOPS, NVIDIA delivers 2.703 TFLOPS. That is roughly 1.5 times the single-precision throughput. FP16 is even more lopsided: Intel reaches 8.192 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while NVIDIA stays at 2.703 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. NVIDIA's Turing architecture here does not expose accelerated FP16, which is unusual for the generation but accurate for this specific SKU.

Power draw flips the script. Intel's TDP is 50 W, NVIDIA's is 25 W. The MX550 delivers its results at half the power, and its 12 nm process is older, so the efficiency comparison is nuanced. Intel wins raw performance but consumes twice the power to do it. Both parts use no external power connectors, so neither requires a supplemental PSU connection.

API support differs in one notable way. Intel supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while NVIDIA supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX feature level difference means Intel can handle newer DX12 Ultimate features, including mesh shaders and variable rate shading, while the MX550 lacks those capabilities.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A30M. It delivers 4.096 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.192 TFLOPS FP16, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce MX550's 2.703 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16.

Q: How much faster is the Intel part in the recorded head-to-head benchmark?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, Intel scores 31,894 versus NVIDIA's 20,372, a 56.6% advantage.

Q: Does the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 support ray tracing?

A: No. The MX550 has no ray tracing cores, while the Intel Arc Pro A30M includes 8 dedicated RT cores.

Q: Which GPU consumes less power?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX550, with a 25 W TDP. The Intel Arc Pro A30M has a 50 W TDP, double the power draw.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: Intel offers 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA offers 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life in the database.

Q: Which GPU has better Vulkan performance?

A: The database records a Vulkan score only for the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, at 32,469. No Vulkan score is recorded for the Intel Arc Pro A30M, so a direct comparison cannot be made.

Specification Differences

The clearest differences between the two parts are process node, die size, transistor count, and compute resources.

Intel uses a 6 nm TSMC process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. NVIDIA uses a 12 nm TSMC process with 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. Transistor density is 45.9M per mm² for Intel versus 23.5M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Shading units are identical at 1,024, but TMUs and ROPs differ: Intel has 64 TMUs and 32 ROPs, NVIDIA has 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs. Intel has 8 RT cores, NVIDIA has none.

Clocks favor Intel: 1500 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost versus NVIDIA's 1065 MHz base and 1320 MHz boost. Memory clocks also favor Intel: 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus NVIDIA's 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity and bandwidth favor Intel: 4 GB GDDR6 with 128.0 GB/s versus NVIDIA's 2 GB GDDR6 with 96.00 GB/s. Both use a 64-bit bus.

Pixel rate is 64.00 GPixel/s for Intel versus 21.12 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate is 128.0 GTexel/s versus 42.24 GTexel/s. FP32 is 4.096 TFLOPS versus 2.703 TFLOPS. FP16 is 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 2.703 TFLOPS (1:1).

TDP is 50 W for Intel versus 25 W for NVIDIA. The MX550 is classified as an IGP in slot width, while the Arc Pro A30M has no slot width recorded. Both use PCIe 4.0 x8 and have no power connectors.

DirectX support differs: Intel supports 12 Ultimate (12_2), NVIDIA supports 12 (12_1). OpenGL and Vulkan support match at 4.6 and 1.4, respectively.

Release dates differ by roughly eight months: Intel launched in August 2022, NVIDIA in December 2021.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro A30M wins on nearly every measurable compute metric. It leads in OpenCL, FP32, FP16, pixel rate, texture rate, memory bandwidth, memory capacity, and ray tracing support. For any workload that stresses raw throughput, whether rendering, compute, or machine learning inference that relies on FP16, the Intel part is the stronger choice. Its 4 GB frame buffer also gives it more headroom for larger textures or datasets than the MX550's 2 GB.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 wins on power efficiency. At 25 W, it draws half the power of the Intel part while still delivering usable performance. Its Vulkan score of 32,469 suggests that under Vulkan workloads, it can punch above its OpenCL results, and that score even exceeds the Intel part's OpenCL number. The database does not record an Intel Vulkan score, so this cannot be called a head-to-head win, but it does indicate the MX550 has workload-specific strengths.

The MX550 also sits in a different competitive neighborhood. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 860M and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060, both of which are within a fraction of a percent. That places the MX550 in the field of modern integrated and entry-level discrete GPUs. The Arc Pro A30M, by contrast, keeps company with the NVIDIA TITAN RTX and AMD Radeon Pro 570X, desktop-class workstation cards. The Intel part is competing several tiers above its power class.

For a thin-and-light laptop where battery life and thermals are paramount, the MX550's 25 W TDP is a meaningful advantage. For a mobile workstation where compute throughput matters more than power draw, the Arc Pro A30M is the clear pick.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: the Intel Arc Pro A30M is the faster GPU, and the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 is the more efficient one. Intel wins the only recorded head-to-head benchmark by 56.6%, and it leads in every major compute specification. It has more memory, more bandwidth, higher clocks, more TMUs and ROPs, dedicated ray tracing cores, and modern DirectX 12 Ultimate support. Its 76th percentile ranking and its rival list, which includes the NVIDIA TITAN RTX, confirm that it performs like a desktop-class part in a mobile form factor.

The MX550 is not without merit. Its 25 W TDP is half of Intel's, and its Vulkan score of 32,469 shows it can deliver strong results in the right API. Its nearest rivals, including the AMD Radeon 860M and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060, show that it competes effectively in the entry-level mobile space. But its 2 GB memory capacity, 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, and lack of RT cores limit its ceiling.

A buyer should choose the Intel Arc Pro A30M if the priority is compute performance, ray tracing capability, memory headroom, or future-proofing through DirectX 12 Ultimate. A buyer should choose the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 if the priority is minimal power consumption, cooler operation, or Vulkan-specific workloads where its recorded score suggests strength. Both parts are end-of-life, so availability will determine practical options, but on the recorded data, Intel is the performance winner and NVIDIA is the efficiency winner.