Intel Arc Pro A60 vs NVIDIA P102-100 Comparison

The Intel Arc Pro A60 and NVIDIA P102-100 present a fascinating generational clash: one is a modern, feature-rich workstation GPU, while the other is a repurposed mining card with raw compute muscle. Their head-to-head benchmark results carve out distinct territories, with each card claiming victory in a different API. The data reveals a 28% lead for the Arc Pro A60 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the P102-100 counters with a 15.3% advantage in Geekbench Vulkan. This split is not just about speed but about architectural priorities, making the choice between them highly dependent on the specific workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking divergence is in the two Geekbench tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Intel Arc Pro A60 scores 63,485 against the NVIDIA P102-100’s 49,602. This is a decisive 28% delta, placing Intel firmly ahead in this compute-heavy API. The Arc Pro A60’s performance here is not an outlier; its average benchmark score of 60,326 is within 0.3% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 (60,347) and 2.8% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (58,657). This suggests that in OpenCL workloads, the Intel card punches well above its class, leveraging its modern architecture to deliver competitive results against much more expensive contemporary hardware.

Conversely, the Geekbench Vulkan test flips the script. The P102-100 scores 67,454, which is 15.3% higher than the Arc Pro A60’s 57,166. This is a massive swing, showing that the older NVIDIA card has a significant edge in this specific API. The P102-100’s average score of 58,528 is only 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (58,657) and 0.5% ahead of the Intel Arc A570M (58,239), indicating that despite its age, it remains a formidable competitor in Vulkan-based applications. The 15.3% delta in this test is larger than the 28% delta in OpenCL when measured as a ratio, but the absolute point spread is similar, showing that neither card is a clear overall winner.

What do these numbers imply? The Intel card’s OpenCL dominance likely stems from its higher transistor density (42.8M / mm² versus 25.1M / mm²) and its 6nm TSMC process node, which allows for more efficient compute per clock. The NVIDIA card, built on a 16nm node, compensates with a higher raw FP32 throughput (10.77 TFLOPS versus 8.397 TFLOPS) and a wider memory bus (320-bit versus 192-bit), which may explain its Vulkan advantage where memory bandwidth is often a critical factor. The data suggests that Intel optimized for general compute (OpenCL) while NVIDIA’s older architecture still excels in graphics-oriented APIs (Vulkan). For a user, this means the Arc Pro A60 is the safer choice for compute-centric tasks, while the P102-100 might surprise in gaming or graphics-heavy workloads that utilize Vulkan.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the choice hinges on the API of your primary applications. If your software relies on OpenCL, the Intel Arc Pro A60 is the clear winner, offering a 28% performance advantage. Its average score of 60,326 places it in the 88th percentile of all GPUs, tied with the P102-100’s percentile but with a higher raw average. The Arc Pro A60 also benefits from being an active product with modern features, whereas the P102-100 is end-of-life.

If your work is built around Vulkan, the NVIDIA P102-100 is the better performer, with a 15.3% lead. Its Vulkan score of 67,454 is particularly impressive for a card from 2018, and its average score of 58,528 is only marginally lower than the Arc Pro A60’s 60,326. However, the P102-100’s lack of display outputs and its mining-oriented design make it unsuitable for any workstation that requires a monitor connection. The data shows it is a compute-only solution, which severely limits its practical use cases despite its Vulkan prowess.

For a general-purpose workstation, the Intel Arc Pro A60 is the logical pick. It wins the more common OpenCL benchmark, has display outputs, and is currently in production. For a specialized Vulkan compute node where display output is not needed, the P102-100 offers a raw performance edge that could justify its older architecture. The verdict is not about which is "better" overall, but which aligns with your software stack. The data shows a tie in wins (1-1), but the Arc Pro A60’s versatility and modern feature set tip the scales for most users.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 has an average benchmark score of 60,326, while the NVIDIA P102-100 has an average score of 58,528. This puts the Intel card 3% ahead on average.

Q: Is the NVIDIA P102-100 better in any benchmark?

A: Yes, in Geekbench Vulkan, the P102-100 scores 67,454, which is 15.3% higher than the Arc Pro A60’s 57,166. This is its only head-to-head win.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 has a transistor density of 42.8M / mm², while the NVIDIA P102-100 has a density of 25.1M / mm². This is a 70% higher density for the Intel chip.

Q: How do these cards compare to the AMD Radeon PRO V710?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 is 2.8% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO V710 in average score (60,326 vs 58,657). The NVIDIA P102-100 is 0.2% behind the same AMD card (58,528 vs 58,657).

Q: Does the NVIDIA P102-100 support modern APIs?

A: It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but it lacks DirectX 12 Ultimate support and has no ray tracing cores, unlike the Intel Arc Pro A60.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The NVIDIA P102-100 has a higher memory bandwidth of 440.3 GB/s, while the Intel Arc Pro A60 has 384.0 GB/s. However, the Intel card has 12 GB of memory versus the NVIDIA card’s 5 GB.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ significantly across nearly every specification. The Intel Arc Pro A60 uses a 6nm process node, while the NVIDIA P102-100 uses a 16nm node. The Intel chip, DG2-256, has 11,500 million transistors on a 269 mm² die, whereas the NVIDIA GP102 has 11,800 million transistors on a much larger 471 mm² die. Clock speeds also diverge: the Intel card runs at a base of 900 MHz and a boost of 2050 MHz, while the NVIDIA card runs at a higher base of 1582 MHz but a lower boost of 1683 MHz. Memory configurations are starkly different: the Arc Pro A60 offers 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, while the P102-100 has 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 320-bit bus. The Intel card has a 130W TDP with a suggested 300W PSU, while the NVIDIA card has a 250W TDP and requires a 600W PSU. The P102-100 is dual-slot with two 8-pin power connectors, while the Arc Pro A60 is single-slot with no specified power connectors. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 4.0 x16 for Intel versus PCIe 1.0 x4 for NVIDIA. Finally, the Arc Pro A60 has four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the P102-100 has no display outputs at all.

Architecture Differences

Architecturally, these are two completely different generations. The Intel Arc Pro A60 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the Alchemist generation for Pro Series, while the NVIDIA P102-100 is based on the older Pascal architecture. The Intel card features 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, alongside 16 dedicated ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA card has more shading units (3200), TMUs (200), and ROPs (80), but lacks ray tracing cores entirely. The Intel card’s FP32 throughput is 8.397 TFLOPS, while the NVIDIA card is higher at 10.77 TFLOPS. However, the Intel card excels in FP16 with 16.79 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), whereas the NVIDIA card has a paltry 168.3 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio). The Intel card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the NVIDIA card only supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel card is manufactured by TSMC on a 6nm process, while the NVIDIA card is also TSMC but on a 16nm process. The Intel card’s higher transistor density (42.8M / mm²) reflects its modern design, while the NVIDIA card’s lower density (25.1M / mm²) is typical of Pascal-era chips. The P102-100’s architecture was designed for mining, which explains its no-display-output design and its PCIe 1.0 x4 interface, which is a bottleneck for data transfer but not for mining compute.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro A60 wins in scenarios that demand modern features and compute efficiency. Its OpenCL score of 63,485 is 28% higher than the P102-100, making it the superior choice for software that leverages OpenCL for tasks like rendering, simulation, or machine learning inference. Its 12 GB of GDDR6 memory is more than double the P102-100’s 5 GB, allowing for larger datasets to reside in VRAM. The card’s single-slot design and 130W TDP make it far easier to integrate into a workstation, and its four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs make it a functional display adapter. The presence of 16 ray tracing cores also gives it a future-proofing advantage in applications that support hardware ray tracing. Its average score of 60,326 places it in the 88th percentile, matching the P102-100 but with a higher absolute score.

The NVIDIA P102-100 wins in raw Vulkan performance, with a score of 67,454 that is 15.3% ahead of the Arc Pro A60. This makes it the better option for Vulkan-centric compute workloads, such as certain game engines or scientific applications that have adopted Vulkan as their primary API. Its higher FP32 throughput (10.77 TFLOPS) and memory bandwidth (440.3 GB/s) are clear advantages in tasks that are not bound by API overhead. However, its wins are confined to this niche. The card’s end-of-life status, lack of display outputs, and dual-slot 250W design with two 8-pin connectors make it unsuitable for general-purpose use. It is a compute-only device, and its PCIe 1.0 x4 interface severely limits data transfer speeds, which could negate its performance advantages in real-world applications that require frequent CPU-GPU communication. For a mining-adjacent or headless compute server, the P102-100’s Vulkan edge might be relevant, but for almost everything else, the Arc Pro A60 is the data-backed winner.