Intel Arc Pro A60M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the Intel Arc Pro A60M versus the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106. Both entries in the database show empty benchmark arrays, zero average benchmark scores, and identical percentile rankings at the 50th percentile against all GPUs. Consequently, there are no measured wins for either product in direct comparison, and the win counters for both items rest at zero.

The absence of competing benchmark scores means the comparison must rely on the specification-level data recorded for each GPU. The NVIDIA part shows a raw compute advantage in several measurable categories. Its FP32 throughput is listed at 15.11 TFLOPS, while the Intel part records 5.325 TFLOPS. That places the NVIDIA GPU at approximately 2.84 times the single-precision floating-point rate of the Intel GPU. Similarly, the NVIDIA part delivers 15.11 TFLOPS for FP16 with a 1:1 ratio, whereas the Intel part shows 10.65 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The Intel GPU's FP16 figure is derived from a rate that is half its FP32 output, indicating a different execution path for half-precision work.

Pixel throughput also favors the NVIDIA part. The RTX 4060 AD106 records 118.1 GPixel/s, compared to 83.20 GPixel/s for the Arc Pro A60M. Texture fill rates show 236.2 GTexel/s for NVIDIA and 166.4 GTexel/s for Intel. These figures indicate the NVIDIA GPU sustains higher output across both rasterization and texture-mapping stages. The Intel part counters with a higher TMU count (128 versus 96) and a higher ROP count (64 versus 48), yet the NVIDIA GPU's higher clock rates overcome those structural disadvantages in the calculated rates.

Clock speeds explain much of the performance gap. The NVIDIA GPU operates at a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost clock of 2460 MHz. The Intel GPU runs at 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part's boost clock is nearly double the Intel part's boost clock. Memory bandwidth also leans toward NVIDIA: 272.0 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s, with the NVIDIA memory running at 2125 MHz (17 Gbps effective) compared to 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for the Intel part. Both use 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 computing throughput?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 records 15.11 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc Pro A60M records 5.325 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA part is approximately 2.84 times higher in this measurement.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same memory configuration?

A: Both use 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The NVIDIA part has higher memory bandwidth at 272.0 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s for the Intel part, and a faster memory clock of 2125 MHz (17 Gbps effective) compared to 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective).

Q: What are the process node differences between the two chips?

A: The Intel DG2-256 chip is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA AD106 chip is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. Both are produced by the same foundry but on different nodes.

Q: How do the transistor counts and die sizes compare?

A: The NVIDIA AD106 contains 22,900 million transistors on a 188 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 121.8M per mm². The Intel DG2-256 contains 11,500 million transistors on a 269 mm² die, giving a density of 42.8M per mm².

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 has 24 RT cores. The Intel Arc Pro A60M has 16 RT cores.

Q: What is the production status of each product?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60M is listed as Active. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 is listed as End-of-life, with the GeForce 30 series as its predecessor and GeForce 50 as its successor.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural families. The Intel Arc Pro A60M uses the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-256 chip, belonging to the Alchemist generation within the Pro-Series Mobile lineup. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD106 chip, part of the GeForce 40 series.

The manufacturing process differs despite the same foundry. Intel's chip is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, while NVIDIA's chip uses a 5 nm process at TSMC. This contributes to distinct transistor densities. The Intel die measures 269 mm² and holds 11,500 million transistors, a density of 42.8M per mm². The NVIDIA die is smaller at 188 mm² but packs 22,900 million transistors, reaching 121.8M per mm². The NVIDIA chip achieves more than double the transistor count on a substantially smaller die.

Compute resources are organized differently. The Intel part has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The NVIDIA part has 3072 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The Intel GPU carries more texture mapping units and raster output units, but the NVIDIA GPU has 50% more shading units. Ray tracing hardware also differs: Intel includes 16 RT cores, while NVIDIA includes 24 RT cores. NVIDIA additionally integrates 96 tensor cores, a feature absent from the Intel specification data.

Clock behavior separates the two designs. The Intel GPU runs at 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost. The NVIDIA GPU runs at 1830 MHz base and 2460 MHz boost, substantially higher in both states. The memory clocks differ as well, with Intel at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) and NVIDIA at 2125 MHz (17 Gbps effective).

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The power interface and physical form factor differ: Intel is listed as an IGP with no power connector data, while NVIDIA is a dual-slot card with a single 12-pin power connector and a suggested PSU rating of 300 W.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show the following differences between the two GPUs:

• Process node: Intel uses 6 nm; NVIDIA uses 5 nm, both at TSMC.
• Transistors: Intel has 11,500 million; NVIDIA has 22,900 million.
• Die size: Intel measures 269 mm²; NVIDIA measures 188 mm².
• Transistor density: Intel records 42.8M per mm²; NVIDIA records 121.8M per mm².
• Base clock: Intel at 900 MHz; NVIDIA at 1830 MHz.
• Boost clock: Intel at 1300 MHz; NVIDIA at 2460 MHz.
• Memory clock: Intel at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective); NVIDIA at 2125 MHz (17 Gbps effective).
• Memory bandwidth: Intel at 256.0 GB/s; NVIDIA at 272.0 GB/s.
• Shading units: Intel has 2048; NVIDIA has 3072.
• TMUs: Intel has 128; NVIDIA has 96.
• ROPs: Intel has 64; NVIDIA has 48.
• RT cores: Intel has 16; NVIDIA has 24.
• Tensor cores: Intel lists none; NVIDIA has 96.
• Pixel rate: Intel at 83.20 GPixel/s; NVIDIA at 118.1 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: Intel at 166.4 GTexel/s; NVIDIA at 236.2 GTexel/s.
• FP32: Intel at 5.325 TFLOPS; NVIDIA at 15.11 TFLOPS.
• FP16: Intel at 10.65 TFLOPS (2:1); NVIDIA at 15.11 TFLOPS (1:1).
• TDP: Intel at 95 W; NVIDIA at 115 W.
• Slot width: Intel is IGP; NVIDIA is dual-slot.
• Power connector: Intel lists none; NVIDIA uses 1x 12-pin.
• Suggested PSU: Intel lists none; NVIDIA lists 300 W.
• Bus interface: Intel uses PCIe 4.0 x16; NVIDIA uses PCIe 4.0 x8.
• Display outputs: Intel is portable device dependent; NVIDIA has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.
• Production status: Intel is Active; NVIDIA is End-of-life.
• Release date: Intel released on 2023-06-05; NVIDIA released on 2024-03-31.
• Predecessor/successor: Intel lists none; NVIDIA lists GeForce 30 as predecessor and GeForce 50 as successor.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro A60M holds structural advantages in specific resource counts. It has more TMUs (128 versus 96) and more ROPs (64 versus 48). Its die is larger at 269 mm² versus 188 mm², and its TDP is lower at 95 W versus 115 W. The Intel part also uses a wider PCIe interface at x16 versus x8, and it remains in Active production status. Its FP16 throughput of 10.65 TFLOPS, while lower than NVIDIA's 15.11 TFLOPS, still represents a doubling of its own FP32 rate, which may indicate a dedicated path for half-precision workloads. The Intel part's release date of June 2023 predates the NVIDIA part's March 2024 release.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 wins on nearly every measured performance metric. It delivers higher FP32 (15.11 versus 5.325 TFLOPS), higher FP16 (15.11 versus 10.65 TFLOPS), higher pixel rate (118.1 versus 83.20 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (236.2 versus 166.4 GTexel/s), and higher memory bandwidth (272.0 versus 256.0 GB/s). It has more shading units (3072 versus 2048), more RT cores (24 versus 16), and includes 96 tensor cores where Intel lists none. Its clock speeds are substantially higher at 2460 MHz boost versus 1300 MHz. The NVIDIA part has a smaller die with more than double the transistor count, indicating a denser design. It has a dedicated display output configuration with 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, whereas the Intel part's outputs depend on the portable device.

The NVIDIA part's higher TDP of 115 W versus 95 W aligns with its higher throughput. The suggested PSU rating of 300 W applies to the NVIDIA card, while the Intel part, being an IGP, lists no such requirement. The PCIe interface difference favors Intel at x16, but the NVIDIA part operates at x8, which still supports high bandwidth over the PCIe 4.0 standard.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear separation in measured capability. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106 shows approximately 2.84 times the FP32 throughput of the Intel Arc Pro A60M, along with higher pixel and texture rates. Its FP16 performance matches its FP32 at 15.11 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio that the Intel part does not match. The NVIDIA GPU also carries more shading units, more RT cores, and the only tensor core implementation between the two.

The Intel Arc Pro A60M offers a lower TDP, a wider PCIe bus interface, more TMUs and ROPs, and a larger die. It remains in active production, while the NVIDIA part is end-of-life. Its release date is earlier, and its FP16 rate, while lower in absolute terms, doubles its FP32 rate, a feature that may suit specific half-precision tasks. The Intel part's 95 W power draw is the lowest among the two.

For workloads that depend on raw compute throughput, ray tracing, tensor operations, or high clock rates, the data favors the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 AD106. For a lower-power integrated solution with a wider bus interface and active production status, the Intel Arc Pro A60M is the recorded option. The absence of direct benchmark scores means these conclusions derive from specification-level analysis rather than measured application performance. The database shows no wins for either product in head-to-head testing, as no such tests are recorded.