Intel Arc Pro A60 vs NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal Comparison

The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal holds a clear performance lead over the Intel Arc Pro A60 in every direct benchmark comparison, with the largest gap appearing in Vulkan workloads where the TITAN X Pascal is 35.6% ahead. The TITAN X Pascal wins both head-to-head tests, securing a 2-0 record, while the Intel Arc Pro A60 trails by 5.1% in OpenCL and by a substantial margin in Vulkan. These results place the TITAN X Pascal in the 91st percentile of all GPUs, versus the 88th percentile for the Arc Pro A60, confirming that the Pascal-generation flagship remains the stronger compute performer despite its age.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive victory for the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal comes in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where it scores 77,499 against the Intel Arc Pro A60's 57,166. That 35.6% delta is not a marginal edge; it represents a dominant performance gap that will be felt in any Vulkan-based application or game. The TITAN X Pascal's architecture clearly handles the Vulkan API with far greater efficiency, and the data suggests that the Arc Pro A60 is not competitive in this workload category.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the margin narrows considerably but still favors the NVIDIA card. The TITAN X Pascal scores 66,696, while the Intel Arc Pro A60 scores 63,485, a 5.1% difference. This is a much closer contest, indicating that in OpenCL-heavy compute tasks, the Arc Pro A60 can hold its own to a degree. Still, the TITAN X Pascal comes out ahead, and when both tests are averaged, the TITAN X Pascal's mean benchmark score of 72,098 stands well above the Arc Pro A60's 60,326.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the TITAN X Pascal's average score puts it within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6650M. The Intel Arc Pro A60, by contrast, sits exactly at parity with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 (0% delta) and 0.3% above the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48. These rival positions show that the TITAN X Pascal competes with higher-tier workstation and gaming GPUs, while the Arc Pro A60 is bracketed by a different class of hardware, including a flagship RTX card that it matches in average score but not in the specific tests where the TITAN X Pascal excels.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural generations and design philosophies. The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal uses the GP102 chip built on TSMC's 16 nm process, packing 11,800 million transistors into a 471 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 25.1 million per mm², which was state-of-the-art for its 2016 release. The Intel Arc Pro A60, on the other hand, uses the DG2-256 chip on TSMC's 6 nm node, with 11,500 million transistors in a much smaller 269 mm² die, achieving a far higher density of 42.8 million per mm². The newer process node gives Intel a significant efficiency advantage in terms of density, but the raw transistor count is nearly identical between the two.

Clock speeds tell a story of two very different strategies. The TITAN X Pascal runs at a base clock of 1417 MHz and boosts to 1531 MHz, while the Arc Pro A60 has a much lower base clock of 900 MHz but a much higher boost clock of 2050 MHz. This suggests the Intel card is designed to ramp aggressively under load, whereas the Pascal card operates in a narrower frequency range. Memory clocks also differ: the TITAN X Pascal uses 1251 MHz memory (10 Gbps effective), while the Arc Pro A60 uses 2000 MHz memory (16 Gbps effective), indicating newer, faster memory technology on the Intel side.

The memory subsystems diverge in bus width and bandwidth. The TITAN X Pascal features a 384-bit bus with GDDR5X memory, delivering 480.4 GB/s of bandwidth across 12 GB. The Arc Pro A60 also has 12 GB of memory, but it uses GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, resulting in 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The TITAN X Pascal's wider bus provides a 25.1% bandwidth advantage, which contributes to its higher fill rates and overall compute throughput.

Shader and rasterization resources heavily favor the NVIDIA card. The TITAN X Pascal has 3,584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 96 render output units (ROPs), compared to the Arc Pro A60's 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. This translates to a pixel rate of 147.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 342.9 GTexel/s for the TITAN X Pascal, versus 131.2 GPixel/s and 262.4 GTexel/s for the Arc Pro A60. The Intel card does include 16 ray tracing cores, which the Pascal GPU lacks entirely, but this feature does not appear in the benchmark results and provides no direct compute advantage in the tested workloads.

Power and physical design also differ sharply. The TITAN X Pascal consumes 250 W and requires a 600 W suggested power supply, with dual-slot cooling and a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connector setup. The Arc Pro A60 is far more efficient on paper, with a 130 W TDP and a 300 W suggested PSU, running as a single-slot card with no auxiliary power connectors. The TITAN X Pascal is 267 mm long, 112 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, while the Arc Pro A60's dimensions are not listed. The Pascal card also uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Intel card uses PCIe 4.0 x16, and the display outputs differ: the TITAN X Pascal offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Arc Pro A60 has 4x DisplayPort 2.0.

The Verdict

From the benchmark data alone, the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal is the superior performer. It wins both head-to-head tests, holds a higher percentile ranking (91st vs. 88th), and has a significantly higher average benchmark score (72,098 vs. 60,326). Anyone prioritizing raw compute performance in OpenCL or Vulkan workloads should choose the TITAN X Pascal without hesitation.

The Intel Arc Pro A60, however, is not without merit. Its 5.1% deficit in OpenCL is respectable, and it matches the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 in average score, which is a notable achievement for a low-power, single-slot card. The Arc Pro A60 also offers modern features like ray tracing cores, a smaller die on a newer process node, and PCIe 4.0 support, which the Pascal card cannot match. For users who need these features or who prioritize power efficiency and a compact form factor, the Arc Pro A60 is the sensible pick, but it comes with a clear performance penalty in the tests recorded here.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Vulkan performance?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal wins decisively, scoring 77,499 versus 57,166 for the Intel Arc Pro A60, a 35.6% advantage.

Q: How close are the two in OpenCL performance?

A: They are relatively close, with the TITAN X Pascal scoring 66,696 and the Arc Pro A60 scoring 63,485, a 5.1% difference in favor of the NVIDIA card.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The TITAN X Pascal averages 72,098 across all benchmarks, while the Arc Pro A60 averages 60,326, leaving a gap of roughly 11,772 points.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro A60 have any hardware feature the TITAN X Pascal lacks?

A: Yes, the Arc Pro A60 includes 16 ray tracing cores, whereas the TITAN X Pascal has no ray tracing cores at all.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The TITAN X Pascal has higher memory bandwidth at 480.4 GB/s, compared to the Arc Pro A60's 384.0 GB/s.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The TITAN X Pascal has a 250 W TDP and suggests a 600 W power supply, while the Arc Pro A60 has a 130 W TDP and suggests a 300 W power supply.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal wins in every benchmark category recorded, making it the clear choice for performance-focused users. Its 35.6% lead in Vulkan is particularly pronounced, suggesting it is well-suited for applications and games that leverage this API. The 5.1% OpenCL advantage, while smaller, still places it ahead in compute tasks. The TITAN X Pascal also wins on pixel rate (147.0 GPixel/s vs. 131.2 GPixel/s) and texture rate (342.9 GTexel/s vs. 262.4 GTexel/s), reinforcing its dominance in rasterization-heavy workloads. Its 480.4 GB/s bandwidth and 384-bit bus give it a clear edge in memory-intensive scenarios.

The Intel Arc Pro A60 wins on efficiency and modern features, even if it loses on raw performance. Its 130 W TDP versus 250 W means it draws far less power, and its single-slot design with no power connectors makes it far easier to install in constrained systems. The 6 nm process node and 42.8M / mm² transistor density indicate a more modern design, and the inclusion of 16 ray tracing cores makes it the only option of the two for hardware-accelerated ray tracing. The Arc Pro A60 also supports PCIe 4.0 and 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, which are more current than the TITAN X Pascal's PCIe 3.0 and mixed display outputs. For users who need these capabilities or who prioritize low power draw, the Arc Pro A60 is the better fit, despite its benchmark deficit.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal | Intel Arc Pro A60 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | GP102 | DG2-256 |

| Architecture | Pascal | Xe-HPG |

| Process Node | 16 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 11,800 million | 11,500 million |

| Die Size | 471 mm² | 269 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 25.1M / mm² | 42.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1417 MHz | 900 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1531 MHz | 2050 MHz |

| Memory Type | GDDR5X | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 480.4 GB/s | 384.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3584 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 224 | 128 |

| ROPs | 96 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | None | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 147.0 GPixel/s | 131.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 342.9 GTexel/s | 262.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 10.97 TFLOPS | 8.397 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 171.5 GFLOPS (1:64) | 16.79 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 130 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | 4x DisplayPort 2.0 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2016-08-01 | 2023-06-05 |

| Launch MSRP | 1,199 USD | Not listed |