GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB and Intel Arc Pro A30M represent two very different approaches to workstation graphics, and the benchmark data makes the performance hierarchy clear. The RTX A2000 delivers more than double the OpenCL compute performance of the Arc Pro A30M, establishing it as the dominant option for compute-heavy workloads. However, the Arc Pro A30M’s substantially lower power draw and mobile-oriented design make it a specialized tool for specific deployment scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB has an average benchmark score of 34154, while the Intel Arc Pro A30M scores 31894. The RTX A2000 sits at the 79th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 76th percentile for the Arc Pro A30M.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the head-to-head OpenCL test?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A2000 scores 66998 versus 31894 for the Arc Pro A30M, a delta of 110.1% in favor of the NVIDIA card. This is the only shared benchmark between the two, and the NVIDIA card wins it outright.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The RTX A2000 comes with 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Arc Pro A30M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, providing 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The RTX A2000 has a TDP of 70 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Arc Pro A30M has a TDP of 50 W and has no suggested PSU listed, reflecting its mobile-oriented design.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A30M boosts to 2000 MHz, while the NVIDIA RTX A2000 boosts to only 1200 MHz. Despite the lower clock speed, the RTX A2000 achieves significantly higher FP32 throughput due to its larger shader array.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are end-of-life products. The NVIDIA card was released on 2021-11-22, while the Intel card launched later on 2022-08-07.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for most professional use cases: the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB. Its 110.1% advantage in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark is decisive, and its average score of 34154 places it in the 79th percentile, well above the Arc Pro A30M’s 31894 and 76th percentile standing. For any workload that relies on raw compute, rendering, simulation, or data processing, the RTX A2000 is the superior choice.

The Intel Arc Pro A30M, however, has a distinct role. Its 50 W TDP makes it significantly more power-efficient than the 70 W RTX A2000, and its portable device-dependent display outputs suggest it is designed for embedded or mobile systems where space and power are at a premium. If the workload is light and the platform is power-constrained, the Arc Pro A30M is the rational pick, but only when the performance sacrifice is acceptable.

For desktop workstations with standard power budgets, the RTX A2000 is the verdict. Its 12 GB memory capacity, 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 7.987 TFLOPS FP32 performance leave the Arc Pro A30M’s 4 GB and 4.096 TFLOPS far behind. The RTX A2000 also carries a launch MSRP of 449 USD, which is a relevant data point for procurement decisions.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only one benchmark appears in both cards’ result sets: Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the NVIDIA RTX A2000 scores 66998, while the Intel Arc Pro A30M manages 31894. The 110.1% delta is enormous, the NVIDIA card is not merely faster, it is more than twice as fast. This is the single most important comparative data point, and it favors the RTX A2000 overwhelmingly.

When contextualized against their respective nearest rivals, the picture sharpens. The RTX A2000’s average score of 34154 is within 0.2% of the NVIDIA RTX A1000 (34207) and 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT (34133). It trails the NVIDIA TITAN V (34355) by just 0.6%. The Arc Pro A30M’s 31894 average places it 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA TITAN RTX (31676) and 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (31532), while sitting 0.9% behind the AMD Radeon Pro 570X (32176) and 1.5% behind the AMD FirePro S10000 (32388). In short, the RTX A2000 competes in a higher performance tier entirely.

The wins tally reflects this: the RTX A2000 claims 1 win in the head-to-head, the Arc Pro A30M claims 0. There is no benchmark category where the Intel card beats the NVIDIA card.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge sharply across nearly every specification. The RTX A2000 uses a GA106 chip built on Samsung’s 8 nm process, with 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die. The Arc Pro A30M uses Intel’s DG2-128 chip on TSMC’s 6 nm node, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The Intel chip has a slightly higher transistor density (45.9M / mm² versus 43.5M / mm²), but the NVIDIA chip is physically larger and contains more transistors overall.

Memory is another major differentiator. The RTX A2000 offers 12 GB of GDDR6 with a 192-bit bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Arc Pro A30M offers only 4 GB on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card also has far more compute resources: 3328 shading units, 104 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 26 RT cores, and 104 tensor cores. The Intel card has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 RT cores, with no tensor cores listed.

Clock speeds favor Intel: the Arc Pro A30M runs at 1500 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost, versus 562 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost for the RTX A2000. Despite this, the RTX A2000’s FP32 throughput is 7.987 TFLOPS versus 4.096 TFLOPS for the Intel card. In FP16, the RTX A2000 maintains 7.987 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the Arc Pro A30M reaches 8.192 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, making it slightly faster in that specific precision.

Physical and interface differences matter too. The RTX A2000 is a dual-slot PCIe 4.0 x16 card, 167 mm long and 69 mm high, with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The Arc Pro A30M has no listed dimensions, uses PCIe 4.0 x8, and its display outputs are portable device dependent. Both cards have no external power connectors and support DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Architecture Differences

The RTX A2000 is built on NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture, part of the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) generation. It includes dedicated RT cores (26) and tensor cores (104), enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The Arc Pro A30M uses Intel’s Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist Pro-Series Mobile generation, and includes 8 RT cores but no tensor cores.

The process technologies differ: Samsung 8 nm for NVIDIA versus TSMC 6 nm for Intel. The TSMC node is more advanced, allowing Intel to pack 7,200 million transistors into 157 mm², but NVIDIA’s larger 276 mm² die holds 12,000 million transistors. This transistor advantage underpins the RTX A2000’s superior raw performance.

Memory architecture also differs fundamentally. The RTX A2000’s 192-bit bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth provide a wide, high-throughput path, while the Arc Pro A30M’s 64-bit bus and 128.0 GB/s bandwidth are half as wide and half as fast. The NVIDIA card’s 12 GB capacity is triple the Intel card’s 4 GB, allowing much larger datasets to reside in VRAM.

The RTX A2000 has a predecessor (Quadro Turing) and successor (Workstation Ada), indicating a mature product line. The Arc Pro A30M has neither, marking it as a standalone entry in Intel’s professional lineup.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB wins on raw compute performance. Its 7.987 TFLOPS FP32 output is nearly double the Arc Pro A30M’s 4.096 TFLOPS, and its Geekbench OpenCL score is 110.1% higher. The 12 GB memory capacity and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for large datasets, complex 3D scenes, and AI inference with tensor cores. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark decisively.

Intel Arc Pro A30M wins on power efficiency and form factor. At 50 W TDP, it draws 20 W less than the RTX A2000’s 70 W. With no suggested PSU and portable device-dependent outputs, it is clearly intended for compact or mobile systems. Its higher boost clock (2000 MHz versus 1200 MHz) and slightly higher FP16 throughput (8.192 TFLOPS versus 7.987 TFLOPS) give it niche advantages in specific precision-bound tasks.

Use-case split: Choose the RTX A2000 for desktop workstations running rendering, simulation, video editing, or any GPU-compute acceleration. Choose the Arc Pro A30M for embedded systems, thin mobile workstations, or power-constrained deployments where the 50 W TDP is a hard requirement and the workload does not demand high memory bandwidth or capacity. The data does not support the Arc Pro A30M for performance-critical tasks, it wins no benchmarks, but its efficiency profile makes it a viable option for specialized hardware.