Intel Arc Pro A60M vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Workstation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the Intel Arc Pro A60M against the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Workstation. Both entries list empty benchmark arrays, zero wins for either side, and an average benchmark score of zero. Consequently, no frame rate, compute, or render time comparisons can be drawn from the database.

What can be established from the database is the theoretical peak throughput, derived from clock speeds and core configurations. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 delivers a FP32 compute rating of 50.53 TFLOPS, while the Intel Arc Pro A60M is rated at 5.325 TFLOPS. This represents a 9.49x advantage for the NVIDIA part in single-precision floating point operations. The FP16 figures show a different ratio: the NVIDIA card sustains 50.53 TFLOPS (1:1), whereas the Intel card reaches 10.65 TFLOPS (2:1). Here the NVIDIA part leads by 4.75x.

Memory bandwidth shows an NVIDIA advantage of 3.5x. The RTX PRO 4500 accesses 896.0 GB/s over a 256 bit bus, while the Arc Pro A60M manages 256.0 GB/s across a 128 bit bus. Pixel throughput favors the NVIDIA card at 269.6 GPixel/s versus 83.20 GPixel/s, a 3.24x margin. Texture rate is 789.5 GTexel/s for the NVIDIA part versus 166.4 GTexel/s for the Intel part, a 4.74x margin.

The NVIDIA card also carries 82 RT cores and 328 tensor cores; the Intel card lists 16 RT cores and no tensor core count in the database. Shading unit counts are 10496 for NVIDIA versus 2048 for Intel, and TMUs are 328 versus 128. The ROP count is 112 versus 64. Every raw throughput metric in the database favors the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 by a substantial margin.

Neither product has a recorded percentile rank above 50, and both list an avgBenchmarkScore of 0. Without workload-specific results, the database cannot confirm whether the Intel part scales differently in real applications. The absence of benchmark data means all comparisons must remain at the specification level.

The Verdict

The database clearly separates these two products by capability tier. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Workstation is designed for tasks requiring high FP32 throughput, large memory capacity, and hardware tensor acceleration. The Intel Arc Pro A60M targets mobile professional use with lower power draw and a compact IGP form factor.

Data indicates the NVIDIA part is the appropriate selection for compute-heavy workstation workloads. Its 50.53 TFLOPS FP32 rating, 32 GB of GDDR7 memory, and 328 tensor cores place it in a different performance class. The Intel part, with 5.325 TFLOPS FP32 and 8 GB of GDDR6, suits lighter professional tasks where mobility and low power matter more than absolute throughput.

The TDP figures reinforce this split: 200 W for the NVIDIA card versus 95 W for the Intel card. The NVIDIA card also requires a 550 W suggested power supply and a 16-pin connector, while the Intel part uses no external power connector and is listed as IGP slot width. For a mobile or space-constrained system, the Intel Arc Pro A60M is the only viable option in this comparison. For a desktop workstation with power headroom, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 dominates every measured specification.

The release dates place the NVIDIA product nearly two years later: 2025-03-17 versus 2023-06-05. The predecessor field for the NVIDIA card is Workstation Ada, while the Intel card lists no predecessor. Neither card has a successor recorded.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Pro A60M uses the DG2-256 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist generation for Pro-Series Mobile. The process node is 6 nm at TSMC, with 11,500 million transistors on a 269 mm² die. Transistor density is 42.8M per mm².

The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 uses the GB203 chip on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, part of the Blackwell PRO W (x000) generation. The process node is 5 nm at TSMC, with 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die. Transistor density is 120.6M per mm². The NVIDIA chip packs 3.97x more transistors and achieves 2.82x higher density.

RT core counts differ significantly: 82 on the NVIDIA part versus 16 on the Intel part. Tensor cores are present only on the NVIDIA card at 328, while the Intel card lists none. The Intel card supports FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning it can process half-precision at twice the FP32 rate. The NVIDIA card runs FP16 at 1:1, equal to its FP32 rate.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The bus interface differs: PCIe 4.0 x16 for Intel, PCIe 5.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are portable-device-dependent for the Intel card, while the NVIDIA card lists 4x DisplayPort 2.1b.

The NVIDIA card uses GDDR7 memory, the Intel card uses GDDR6. Memory clock rates are recorded as 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA and 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for Intel. The NVIDIA memory bus is twice as wide at 256 bit versus 128 bit.

Specification Differences

The database records the following differences between the two products:

• Chip: DG2-256 versus GB203
• Architecture: Xe-HPG versus Blackwell 2.0
• Generation: Alchemist (Pro-Series Mobile) versus Blackwell PRO W (x000)
• Process node: 6 nm versus 5 nm
• Transistors: 11,500 million versus 45,600 million
• Die size: 269 mm² versus 378 mm²
• Transistor density: 42.8M / mm² versus 120.6M / mm²
• Base clock: 900 MHz versus 1635 MHz
• Boost clock: 1300 MHz versus 2407 MHz
• Memory clock: 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: 8 GB versus 32 GB
• Memory type: GDDR6 versus GDDR7
• Memory bus width: 128 bit versus 256 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 256.0 GB/s versus 896.0 GB/s
• Shading units: 2048 versus 10496
• TMUs: 128 versus 328
• ROPs: 64 versus 112
• RT cores: 16 versus 82
• Tensor cores: not listed versus 328
• Pixel rate: 83.20 GPixel/s versus 269.6 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 166.4 GTexel/s versus 789.5 GTexel/s
• FP32: 5.325 TFLOPS versus 50.53 TFLOPS
• FP16: 10.65 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 50.53 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 95 W versus 200 W
• Slot width: IGP versus Dual-slot
• Power connectors: none versus 1x 16-pin
• Suggested PSU: none versus 550 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 5.0 x16
• Display outputs: Portable Device Dependent versus 4x DisplayPort 2.1b
• Dimensions: not listed versus 267 mm length, 111 mm height, 40 mm width
• Release date: 2023-06-05 versus 2025-03-17
• Predecessor: none versus Workstation Ada

The two cards share API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both are listed as Active in production status. Neither card has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 is rated at 50.53 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc Pro A60M is rated at 5.325 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA card delivers approximately 9.49x the FP32 throughput.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The NVIDIA card has 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 256 bit bus with 896.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel card has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card provides 3.5x the bandwidth and 4x the capacity.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro A60M have tensor cores?

A: The database does not list a tensor core count for the Intel card. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 lists 328 tensor cores.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60M has a TDP of 95 W, while the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 has a TDP of 200 W. The NVIDIA card also lists a suggested 550 W power supply and a 1x 16-pin connector; the Intel card lists no power connector.

Q: Which card is newer and what process node does each use?

A: The Intel card was released on 2023-06-05 and uses a 6 nm TSMC process. The NVIDIA card was released on 2025-03-17 and uses a 5 nm TSMC process.

Q: What form factors do the two cards use?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60M is listed as IGP slot width with no dimensions recorded. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 is Dual-slot with dimensions of 267 mm length, 111 mm height, and 40 mm width.