Intel Arc Pro A60 vs NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile Comparison

NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile leads the Intel Arc Pro A60 in both recorded benchmark disciplines, but the margin tells very different stories about each card's strengths. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA part posts 79,091 points against 63,485 for Intel, a 24.6% advantage that places it in the 91st percentile of all GPUs. The Vulkan gap narrows considerably, with NVIDIA scoring 61,189 versus 57,166, a 7.0% lead that still favors the Ampere architecture but suggests Intel's newer Xe-HPG design closes much of the gap under modern graphics APIs. The average benchmark score of 70,140 for the RTX A3000 Mobile versus 60,326 for the Arc Pro A60 reinforces the overall performance hierarchy, but the per-test deltas reveal a nuanced picture: NVIDIA dominates raw compute throughput, while Intel's architecture is far more competitive in driver-level graphics workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The OpenCL result is the clearest statement of performance separation. NVIDIA's 79,091 score outpaces Intel's 63,485 by 24.6%, a margin that places the RTX A3000 Mobile near the top of its class. This benchmark stresses general-purpose compute through shading units, and the NVIDIA part's 4,096 shading units versus 2,048 on Intel explains the scale of the gap. The 10.08 TFLOPS of FP32 performance on the RTX A3000 Mobile also exceeds the 8.397 TFLOPS on the Arc Pro A60, and the data shows that raw shader count translates directly into OpenCL wins.

The Vulkan benchmark tells a different story about efficiency. NVIDIA still wins, but the 7.0% delta (61,189 versus 57,166) is far smaller than the OpenCL gap. This is notable because the Arc Pro A60 has roughly half the shading units of its rival yet comes within striking distance under Vulkan. The Intel card's higher boost clock of 2050 MHz compared to 1230 MHz on NVIDIA likely contributes here, as does the 2:1 FP16 ratio (16.79 TFLOPS versus 10.08 TFLOPS) that allows Intel to leverage half-precision paths in graphics workloads. The benchmark results indicate that Intel's architecture is not simply a scaled-down competitor; it is a design that punches above its shader count in specific API conditions.

Looking at the broader rival landscape, the RTX A3000 Mobile's average score of 70,140 sits just 0.2% above the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 at 69,986 and 0.4% above the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 at 69,870. It also trails the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE by 1% (70,829) and beats the NVIDIA CMP 90HX by 1.7% (69,000). These are tight margins, suggesting the RTX A3000 Mobile is right at the boundary of its performance tier. The Arc Pro A60's average of 60,326 is effectively tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 at 60,347 (0% delta), 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 at 60,140, 2.5% behind the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M at 61,896, and 2.8% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO V710 at 58,657. The Arc Pro A60 holds its own against a much higher-tier consumer card in average scores, which reflects Intel's professional driver optimization.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile is the faster GPU in every recorded benchmark. For workloads that rely on OpenCL compute — rendering, simulation, data processing — the 24.6% lead is decisive and will translate into measurable time savings. The 91st percentile placement versus the 88th for Intel also positions NVIDIA higher in the overall GPU hierarchy. If raw performance is the sole criterion, the RTX A3000 Mobile is the clear choice.

However, the Vulkan result complicates a simple victory lap. A 7.0% gap is meaningful but not overwhelming, and it indicates that the Arc Pro A60 can handle modern graphics APIs with far better relative efficiency. For users whose primary applications are Vulkan-based, the Intel card offers 91.5% of the NVIDIA performance (57,166 divided by 61,189) at what the architecture suggests is a different power and design philosophy. The Arc Pro A60 also carries 12 GB of memory versus 6 GB on NVIDIA, which matters for large datasets or high-resolution textures even if the benchmark scores do not directly capture that advantage.

The verdict splits by use case. For compute-heavy professional workflows where OpenCL dominates, the RTX A3000 Mobile wins outright. For Vulkan-centric graphics workloads where memory capacity is a bottleneck, the Arc Pro A60 is the more sensible pick despite losing the head-to-head. The data does not support calling the Intel card a "better" GPU, but it does support calling it a more balanced one for specific modern API scenarios.

Architecture Differences

The RTX A3000 Mobile is built on NVIDIA's Ampere architecture, fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process, and packs 17,400 million transistors into a 392 mm² die. The Arc Pro A60 uses Intel's Xe-HPG architecture on TSMC's 6 nm node, with 11,500 million transistors on a 269 mm² die. The process difference is significant: Intel's TSMC node is denser in absolute terms, but NVIDIA's chip still achieves a higher transistor density at 44.4 million per mm² versus 42.8 million per mm². This is surprising given the older node, indicating Ampere's design is more compact per transistor than Xe-HPG.

The shader architecture diverges sharply. NVIDIA field 4,096 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, while Intel uses 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The TMU and ROP counts are identical, meaning texture and pixel throughput are not the differentiator; the shading unit count is. NVIDIA's 32 RT cores and 128 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for ray tracing and AI workloads, while Intel's 16 RT cores lack a tensor core equivalent, relying on general-purpose shaders for AI tasks. This makes the RTX A3000 Mobile structurally superior for machine learning inference and ray-traced rendering.

Clock behavior differs as well. Intel's base clock of 900 MHz and boost of 2050 MHz are far more aggressive than NVIDIA's 600 MHz base and 1230 MHz boost. This is partly a function of the 70 W TDP on NVIDIA versus 130 W on Intel; the higher power budget allows Intel to push clocks much higher. The FP16 output also reflects a philosophical difference: NVIDIA runs 1:1 FP16 to FP32 (10.08 TFLOPS both), while Intel runs 2:1 FP16 to FP32 (16.79 TFLOPS versus 8.397 TFLOPS). Intel's approach prioritizes half-precision throughput, which benefits certain graphics and AI workloads but not full-precision compute.

Specification Differences

The memory configuration is a major separator. NVIDIA offers 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 264.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel doubles capacity to 12 GB of GDDR6 on the same 192-bit bus, achieving 384.0 GB/s due to faster memory at 16 Gbps effective versus 11 Gbps effective on NVIDIA. This is a 45.5% bandwidth advantage for Intel and a 100% capacity advantage.

Power and physical design diverge. The RTX A3000 Mobile consumes 70 W with no power connectors, designed for portable devices, while the Arc Pro A60 draws 130 W, is single-slot, requires a 300 W suggested PSU, and outputs 4x DisplayPort 2.0. NVIDIA's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its mobile orientation, whereas Intel's card is clearly a fixed workstation component. The bus interface is identical (PCIe 4.0 x16), but the production status differs: NVIDIA is end-of-life with a 2021 release, while Intel is active with a 2023 release.

The compute rates favor NVIDIA in FP32 (10.08 TFLOPS versus 8.397 TFLOPS) but favor Intel in FP16 (16.79 versus 10.08). Pixel rate favors Intel at 131.2 GPixel/s versus 78.72 GPixel/s, and texture rate also favors Intel at 262.4 GTexel/s versus 157.4 GTexel/s. These are counterintuitive given the lower shader count, but the higher clocks on Intel drive these wins. Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is a wash.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance in FP32?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile delivers 10.08 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to 8.397 TFLOPS on the Intel Arc Pro A60, a 20% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: How much faster is the RTX A3000 Mobile in OpenCL benchmarks?

A: The RTX A3000 Mobile scores 79,091 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 63,485 for the Arc Pro A60, a 24.6% lead.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro A60 have any memory advantage?

A: Yes. The Arc Pro A60 has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory and 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the RTX A3000 Mobile has 6 GB and 264.0 GB/s, giving Intel double the capacity and 45.5% more bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU is better for Vulkan-based workloads?

A: The RTX A3000 Mobile still wins, but only by 7.0% (61,189 versus 57,166), making the Arc Pro A60 a much closer competitor under Vulkan than under OpenCL.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RTX A3000 Mobile has a 70 W TDP, while the Arc Pro A60 has a 130 W TDP, meaning NVIDIA draws 46% less power.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RTX A3000 Mobile has 4,096 shading units, exactly double the 2,048 on the Arc Pro A60, yet Intel's higher clocks allow it to remain competitive in graphics tests.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A3000 Mobile wins in every benchmark recorded, so the split is about margin and context. OpenCL-heavy workloads are a clear NVIDIA victory: the 24.6% lead means tasks like physics simulation, data analytics, and general GPGPU compute will complete noticeably faster. The 128 tensor cores also give NVIDIA a structural advantage for AI inference and machine learning training, even though those workloads are not in the benchmark set. The 70 W TDP makes it the only viable option for mobile or power-constrained systems, as the Arc Pro A60's 130 W requirement demands a desktop chassis with adequate cooling and a 300 W PSU.

The Arc Pro A60 wins on memory capacity and bandwidth, which are not captured in the Geekbench scores but matter for large texture sets, high-resolution rendering, or multi-app workflows. Its 12 GB frame buffer is double the NVIDIA, and the 384.0 GB/s bandwidth is 45.5% higher, so datasets that exceed 6 GB will force the RTX A3000 Mobile to spill or stall. The Vulkan result also shows Intel's strengths: at a 7.0% deficit, the Arc Pro A60 is a legitimate choice for Vulkan-native applications where the API's low-overhead design can leverage Intel's higher boost clock and FP16 throughput. The single-slot form factor and 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs make it a superior multi-monitor workstation card, whereas NVIDIA's portable-device-dependent outputs limit its display flexibility.

In short: pick the RTX A3000 Mobile for compute power, AI features, and mobile deployment. Pick the Arc Pro A60 for memory-heavy graphics, Vulkan-centric workloads, and fixed workstation setups where its display outputs and capacity are assets. The data shows NVIDIA is the faster card, but Intel wins the scenarios where capacity and bandwidth outrank raw compute.