Intel Arc Pro A60 vs NVIDIA RTX A4500 Comparison

The Verdict

The NVIDIA RTX A4500 and Intel Arc Pro A60 occupy very different tiers of the workstation GPU market, and the recorded benchmark data makes that distinction clear. The RTX A4500 dominates in every head-to-head measurement, with an average benchmark score of 91,671 compared to the Arc Pro A60's 60,326, a difference of roughly 52%. The RTX A4500 also sits at the 93rd percentile among all GPUs, while the Arc Pro A60 ranks at the 88th percentile. For users requiring maximum compute throughput in OpenCL and Vulkan workloads, the RTX A4500 is the unequivocal choice. The Intel Arc Pro A60, meanwhile, is a capable single-slot option with modern display outputs and active production status, suitable for professional environments where space and power constraints matter more than raw compute. The data suggests the RTX A4500 targets heavy 3D rendering and simulation tasks, while the Arc Pro A60 serves lighter professional workloads or multi-GPU configurations where its lower power draw and single-slot form factor are advantages.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4500 records an average benchmark score of 91,671, which is significantly higher than the Intel Arc Pro A60's average of 60,326. The RTX A4500 outperforms its nearest rival, the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile, by 0.6%, while the Arc Pro A60 trails its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M, by 2.5%.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in OpenCL performance?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A4500 scores 141,837, while the Arc Pro A60 scores 63,485. This gives the RTX A4500 a 123.4% advantage, meaning it more than doubles the Intel card's OpenCL performance.

Q: What about Vulkan performance?

A: The RTX A4500 also wins decisively in Vulkan, scoring 129,980 versus the Arc Pro A60's 57,166. The delta is 127.4%, again representing more than double the performance.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient based on the data?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 has a lower TDP at 130 W, compared to the RTX A4500's 200 W. The Arc Pro A60 also requires a 300 W suggested PSU, while the RTX A4500 needs a 550 W unit. However, the RTX A4500 delivers far higher performance per watt given its massive benchmark lead.

Q: Are these GPUs from the same generation?

A: No. The RTX A4500 is from the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) generation, released in 2021, while the Arc Pro A60 belongs to Intel's Alchemist (Pro Series) generation, released in 2023. The RTX A4500 is end-of-life, whereas the Arc Pro A60 remains in active production.

Q: Which GPU supports newer display technology?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 features 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the RTX A4500 uses 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. DisplayPort 2.0 is the newer standard, offering higher bandwidth for high-resolution displays.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs stem from fundamentally different architectures. The NVIDIA RTX A4500 uses the GA102 chip based on the Ampere architecture, fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process. This is a massive chip with 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.1 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel Arc Pro A60, by contrast, employs the DG2-256 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 6 nm process. It contains 11,500 million transistors on a 269 mm² die, with a density of 42.8 million per square millimeter. The process node difference is notable: Intel uses a newer, denser manufacturing process, yet the NVIDIA chip still packs far more transistors overall.

In terms of compute resources, the RTX A4500 houses 7,168 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, 96 ROPs, 56 RT cores, and 224 tensor cores. The Arc Pro A60 has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 16 RT cores, with no tensor cores listed. The tensor core absence is significant for AI and machine learning workloads, where NVIDIA's dedicated hardware provides a clear advantage. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is similar.

Clock behavior differs substantially. The RTX A4500 has a 1050 MHz base clock and 1650 MHz boost, while the Arc Pro A60 starts at 900 MHz base but boosts to 2050 MHz. The Intel card's higher boost clock partially compensates for its fewer shading units, but not enough to close the gap. Memory architecture also diverges: the RTX A4500 uses a 320-bit bus with 20 GB of GDDR6, while the Arc Pro A60 uses a narrower 192-bit bus with 12 GB of GDDR6. Both operate at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective data rate, but the wider bus gives NVIDIA a bandwidth advantage.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal several key differences beyond compute cores. The RTX A4500 has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 320-bit bus and 640.0 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the Arc Pro A60 provides 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card's memory capacity is nearly double, and its bandwidth is 67% higher.

Pixel and texture rates also favor NVIDIA. The RTX A4500 achieves 158.4 GPixel/s and 369.6 GTexel/s, while the Arc Pro A60 manages 131.2 GPixel/s and 262.4 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput tells a similar story: 23.65 TFLOPS for the RTX A4500 versus 8.397 TFLOPS for the Arc Pro A60. Interestingly, FP16 performance flips the ratio: the RTX A4500 delivers 23.65 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio, while the Arc Pro A60 delivers 16.79 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio, meaning Intel's card has relatively stronger half-precision performance.

Physical specifications differ as well. The RTX A4500 is dual-slot with a 267 mm length and 112 mm height, requiring one 8-pin power connector. The Arc Pro A60 is single-slot with no listed power connector, making it easier to fit in dense systems. Power consumption is 200 W for NVIDIA versus 130 W for Intel, and suggested PSU ratings are 550 W and 300 W, respectively. Both use PCIe 4.0 x16 interfaces. The RTX A4500 was released in November 2021 and is now end-of-life, while the Arc Pro A60 launched in June 2023 and remains active. The RTX A4500's predecessor was the Quadro Turing and its successor is Workstation Ada; Intel lists no predecessor or successor for the Arc Pro A60.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data consists of two Geekbench tests, and the RTX A4500 wins both by wide margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A4500 scores 141,837 against the Arc Pro A60's 63,485, a delta of 123.4%. This means the NVIDIA card delivers more than double the OpenCL compute performance. The margin is even larger in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RTX A4500 scores 129,980 versus 57,166, a 127.4% delta. Both results are consistent with the underlying hardware differences: the RTX A4500 has 3.5 times more shading units, nearly double the memory bandwidth, and significantly higher FP32 throughput.

The average benchmark score, which aggregates all recorded tests, shows the RTX A4500 at 91,671 and the Arc Pro A60 at 60,326. That is a 51.9% gap in favor of NVIDIA. The RTX A4500's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (0.6% lower), the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 (0.9% higher), the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 (4.8% lower), and the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 (5.2% lower). The Arc Pro A60's nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 (equal score, 0% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (0.3% lower), the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (2.5% higher), and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (2.8% lower). Notably, the Arc Pro A60's average score is nearly identical to the consumer GeForce RTX 4090 in this database, though that comparison reflects overall average benchmark results, not gaming performance.

The wins tally is 2 for the RTX A4500 and 0 for the Arc Pro A60 across the two head-to-head tests. There is no 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result for the Arc Pro A60, so that test is not part of the direct comparison. The RTX A4500's 3DMark score of 3,196 exists in its individual benchmark list but has no counterpart in the Intel card's records, limiting the scope of direct comparison to the two Geekbench tests.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A4500 wins outright in compute-heavy professional workloads. Its OpenCL score of 141,837 is more than double the Arc Pro A60's, making it the superior choice for GPU-accelerated rendering, simulation, scientific computing, and any task that leverages general-purpose compute. The Vulkan advantage (129,980 versus 57,166) also positions the RTX A4500 as the stronger card for Vulkan-based applications, which are increasingly common in professional visualization and game development. The 20 GB memory capacity and 640 GB/s bandwidth further support large datasets and high-resolution textures, while the tensor cores enable accelerated AI inference and training workloads that the Intel card cannot match due to its lack of tensor hardware.

The Arc Pro A60, while losing on raw performance, has structural advantages that suit specific use cases. Its single-slot design and 130 W TDP make it ideal for multi-GPU workstations or dense server environments where space and power are limited. The 300 W suggested PSU requirement allows integration into systems with modest power budgets. The DisplayPort 2.0 outputs provide future-proofing for next-generation monitors with very high refresh rates or resolutions, a feature the RTX A4500 lacks with its DisplayPort 1.4a. The Arc Pro A60 is also an active product, meaning ongoing driver support and availability, whereas the RTX A4500 is end-of-life. For organizations Standardizing on current hardware with long-term support commitments, the Intel card may be the more sustainable procurement choice despite its lower performance.

The percentile rankings contextualize these trade-offs. The RTX A4500 at the 93rd percentile is a high-end professional card, while the Arc Pro A60 at the 88th percentile is still respectable but clearly mid-range. The data suggests the RTX A4500 for users who prioritize compute throughput above all else, and the Arc Pro A60 for users who need a compact, power-efficient card with modern display connectivity and active production status. The 123.4% and 127.4% deltas in the head-to-head tests are not marginal differences; they represent entirely different performance classes.