Intel Arc Pro A60M vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for the Intel Arc Pro A60M versus the NVIDIA N1X 40SM. Both products have empty benchmark arrays, zero wins assigned to each side, and identical percentile scores against all tracked GPUs at 50. The absence of measured performance data means no direct comparison of frame rates, compute throughput, or application-specific results can be drawn from the database at this time.

The lack of benchmark results is significant because both GPUs occupy the same percentile rank globally, yet their architectural profiles suggest very different performance envelopes. The Intel Arc Pro A60M delivers 5.325 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS, a 4.5x gap in raw floating-point throughput. Texture rate shows an even wider divide: the NVIDIA part reaches 750.7 GTexel/s versus 166.4 GTexel/s for Intel, a 4.5x advantage. Pixel rates are closer, with NVIDIA at 93.84 GPixel/s and Intel at 83.20 GPixel/s, a 12.8% lead for the Blackwell IGP.

Memory bandwidth favors NVIDIA modestly at 273.2 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s, a 6.7% difference. However, memory capacity differs drastically: the NVIDIA N1X 40SM carries 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, while the Intel part has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The NVIDIA solution offers 16x the capacity, which would dominate large dataset workloads, but the database lacks benchmark evidence to quantify that impact.

Clock behavior also differs substantially. The Intel GPU runs a 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost, while the NVIDIA GPU operates at 741 MHz base but boosts to 2346 MHz, a boost ratio of 3.17x versus Intel's 1.44x. The NVIDIA part's higher boost clock, combined with 5120 shading units versus 2048, explains its TFLOPS advantage. The Intel part's lower clock ceiling and fewer execution units constrain its throughput despite the same 50th percentile ranking.

The database records zero head-to-head wins for either product. This is not an indication of parity; rather, it reflects a data gap. Both entries show no nearest rivals, no benchmark scores, and no average scores. Until synthetic or real-world test results are populated, any performance verdict must rest solely on the architectural and specification differences recorded in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc Pro A60M delivers 5.325 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA part is 4.5x higher in this metric.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Pro A60M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA part has 16x the capacity and 6.7% more bandwidth.

Q: What are the API support differences?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan in the database.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 5120 shading units and 40 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc Pro A60M has 2048 shading units and 16 ray tracing cores. NVIDIA also includes 160 tensor cores, while the Intel part has none listed.

Q: How do the boost clocks compare?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM boosts to 2346 MHz, while the Intel Arc Pro A60M boosts to 1300 MHz. The NVIDIA part's boost clock is 80.5% higher.

Q: What are the process nodes and die sizes?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60M uses a 6 nm process at TSMC with a 269 mm² die and 11,500 million transistors. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses a 5 nm process at TSMC with a 382 mm² die, but its transistor count is listed as unknown.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Pro A60M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-256 chip, and belongs to the Alchemist generation for Pro-Series Mobile. It uses TSMC's 6 nm process and integrates 11,500 million transistors on a 269 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 42.8 million per mm². The architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, indicating a full-featured graphics API stack.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM is based on Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB20B chip, from the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. It uses TSMC's 5 nm process and has a larger die at 382 mm², though its transistor count remains unknown in the database. Critically, the API fields for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan are all listed as N/A, which likely reflects its IGP positioning rather than a true absence of support, but the recorded data offers no functional API details.

Execution resources differ sharply. Intel's part has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, 64 render output units, and 16 ray tracing cores. NVIDIA's part has 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 40 ROPs, 40 ray tracing cores, and 160 tensor cores. The NVIDIA GPU has 2.5x more shading units, 2.5x more TMUs, and 2.5x more ray tracing cores, but fewer ROPs (40 versus 64). The tensor core count of 160 gives NVIDIA a dedicated deep learning compute path that Intel's Xe-HPG implementation lacks entirely.

Memory architecture also diverges. Intel uses 8 GB of GDDR6 over a 128-bit bus, while NVIDIA uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X over a 256-bit bus. The NVIDIA part's memory clock is 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective, while Intel's runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective. Despite Intel's higher per-pin data rate, the wider NVIDIA bus yields higher aggregate bandwidth.

The bus interface differs as well: Intel uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while NVIDIA uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs are portable-device dependent for Intel, while NVIDIA lists a single HDMI output. Power connectors are absent on the NVIDIA IGP, and Intel's are not specified.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Arc Pro A60M | NVIDIA N1X 40SM |

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

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Chip | DG2-256 | GB20B |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Die Size | 269 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Transistors | 11,500 million | unknown |

| Transistor Density | 42.8M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 900 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1300 MHz | 2346 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective | 1067 MHz, 8.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 5120 |

| TMUs | 128 | 320 |

| ROPs | 64 | 40 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 16 | 40 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 160 |

| Pixel Rate | 83.20 GPixel/s | 93.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 166.4 GTexel/s | 750.7 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.325 TFLOPS | 24.02 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 10.65 TFLOPS (2:1) | 24.02 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 95 W | unknown |

| Power Connectors | null | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | N/A |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Release Date | 2023-06-05 | 2026-05-31 |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro A60M holds advantages in several specific areas based on the recorded data. Its 64 ROPs exceed NVIDIA's 40 ROPs, which historically supports higher fill rates for certain rasterization workloads, though its pixel rate of 83.20 GPixel/s trails NVIDIA's 93.84 GPixel/s due to clock differences. The Intel part also has a fully specified API stack, including DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the NVIDIA part lists N/A for all three, making Intel the only option with confirmed graphics API compatibility in the database. The 6 nm process and 269 mm² die give Intel a smaller physical footprint, and its 95 W TDP is specified, while NVIDIA's TDP is unknown.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM dominates compute-heavy metrics. Its 24.02 TFLOPS FP32 output is 4.5x Intel's 5.325 TFLOPS. FP16 performance also favors NVIDIA at 24.02 TFLOPS with 1:1 ratio, versus Intel's 10.65 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio. Texture rate of 750.7 GTexel/s versus 166.4 GTexel/s gives NVIDIA a 4.5x lead in texel processing. The 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 40 ray tracing cores provide substantially more parallel execution capacity. The 160 tensor cores add dedicated AI acceleration, a feature entirely absent from the Intel specification.

Memory capacity is the clearest win for NVIDIA. At 128 GB versus 8 GB, the NVIDIA part supports workloads that would exhaust Intel's memory instantly, such as large language model inference or massive scientific datasets. Bandwidth also favors NVIDIA at 273.2 GB/s, though the margin is modest at 6.7%. The 256-bit bus versus 128-bit bus doubles the theoretical memory path width, and the PCIe 5.0 x16 interface provides double the per-lane bandwidth of Intel's PCIe 4.0 x16.

Release timing also differs. Intel's part launched on 2023-06-05, while NVIDIA's is dated 2026-05-31, suggesting a later market entry with more recent architectural advancements.

In rasterization-limited scenarios where ROP count matters more than raw shading throughput, Intel's 64 ROPs may hold an edge, but the recorded pixel rate suggests NVIDIA still wins overall fill. For any workload relying on confirmed API support, Intel is the only viable candidate per the database. For compute density, memory capacity, tensor acceleration, and texture-heavy pipelines, NVIDIA's specifications are decisively superior. The absence of benchmark data prevents quantifying these differences in real-world performance, but the specification gap is unambiguous.