Intel Arc A380E vs NVIDIA B200 SXM6 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not contain any benchmark scores for either the Intel Arc A380E or the NVIDIA B200 SXM6. The head-to-head benchmark fields are empty, and both products show an average benchmark score of 0. Consequently, no direct performance comparisons can be drawn from measured results. Both GPUs sit at the 50th percentile in the database's overall GPU ranking, which is an artifact of having no recorded scores rather than a meaningful performance equivalence. The absence of data means any performance analysis must rely entirely on the architectural and specification differences documented in the database.

Without benchmark results, the only quantitative comparisons available come from the raw specification sheets. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 delivers substantially higher compute throughput on paper, with fp32 performance of 69.34 TFLOPS compared to the Intel Arc A380E's 4.096 TFLOPS. That represents a 16.9x difference in single-precision floating-point capability. The gap in fp16 is similar in scale but different in character: the B200 SXM6 achieves 69.34 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the A380E reaches 8.192 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, meaning the Intel part halves its throughput for fp16 work while the NVIDIA part does not.

Texture processing shows a comparable disparity. The B200 SXM6 records a texture rate of 1,083.4 GTexel/s against 128.0 GTexel/s for the A380E, an 8.5x advantage. Pixel throughput tells a different story, however. The A380E delivers 64.00 GPixel/s while the B200 SXM6 delivers 43.92 GPixel/s, meaning the Intel GPU is approximately 46% faster in raw pixel fill rate despite being vastly outmatched elsewhere. This inversion stems from the NVIDIA part's unusually low ROP count of 24 compared to the Intel part's 32 ROPs, combined with the B200's modest boost clock of 1830 MHz relative to the A380E's fixed 2000 MHz.

Memory bandwidth amplifies the NVIDIA advantage further. The B200 SXM6 accesses 180 GB of HBM3e across an 8192-bit interface for 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The A380E uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, yielding 186.0 GB/s. The B200 provides 44x the bandwidth. Memory capacity differs by 30x. These are the largest deltas recorded between the two products, and they define the respective roles each GPU can plausibly serve.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share a foundry but little else in their design philosophy. Both are fabricated by TSMC, with the Intel Arc A380E on a 6 nm process and the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 on a 5 nm process. Transistor counts diverge dramatically: the A380E integrates 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, while the B200 SXM6 packs 208,000 million transistors onto a 1628 mm² die. The resulting transistor densities are 45.9M per mm² for Intel and 127.8M per mm² for NVIDIA, reflecting the more advanced node and the B200's much larger physical footprint.

The Intel part uses the Xe-HPG architecture under the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. Its DG2-128 chip contains 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, and 8 dedicated ray tracing cores. It has no tensor core count listed. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 uses the Blackwell architecture with a GB100 chip, containing 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, only 24 ROPs, and 592 tensor cores. The B200 has no ray tracing core count listed. The NVIDIA part relies on tensor cores for its compute-heavy workloads, while the Intel part includes ray tracing hardware but lacks tensor acceleration.

Clock behavior differs fundamentally. The A380E runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost, with memory clocked at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective). The B200 SXM6 has a 120 MHz base clock and an 1830 MHz boost clock, with memory at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA base clock is extraordinarily low, suggesting aggressive power management or a design that relies on boost states for actual performance. The Intel part's locked clock implies a simpler power envelope suited to constant duty.

Memory architecture could not be more different. The A380E uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, typical of entry-level consumer or embedded GPUs. The B200 SXM6 uses 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus, a configuration designed for server-scale data movement. The bus width difference is 85x, which explains the bandwidth gap despite relatively similar memory clock speeds.

Interface and output capabilities also diverge. The A380E connects via PCIe 4.0 x8 and provides four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, making it suitable for display-driven workloads. The B200 SXM6 uses PCIe 6.0 x16 and has no display outputs, confirming its role as a compute-only accelerator. The A380E is single-slot with no power connectors and a 75 W TDP, while the B200 SXM6 is an SXM module with a 1000 W TDP. The suggested PSU ratings are 250 W for the Intel part and 1400 W for the NVIDIA part.

API support follows the same split. The A380E supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The B200 SXM6 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating it is not designed for conventional graphics APIs. Production status also differs: the A380E is end-of-life, released on 2024-03-31, while the B200 SXM6 is active, released on 2024-10-31.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, while the Intel Arc A380E has 1,024. The NVIDIA part provides 18.5x more shading units.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The B200 SXM6 delivers 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth from 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus. The A380E delivers 186.0 GB/s from 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus. The NVIDIA part offers roughly 44x more bandwidth.

Q: What is the pixel fill rate difference?

A: The Intel Arc A380E achieves 64.00 GPixel/s, which is higher than the B200 SXM6's 43.92 GPixel/s. The Intel GPU is approximately 46% faster in pixel throughput despite having fewer ROPs relative to its overall size.

Q: Does the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 support display outputs?

A: No. The database lists "No outputs" for the B200 SXM6. The Intel Arc A380E provides 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs.

Q: What are the TDP requirements for each card?

A: The A380E has a 75 W TDP with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The B200 SXM6 has a 1000 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 1400 W.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: Only the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 lists tensor cores, with 592 units. The Intel Arc A380E has no tensor core count in the database but does include 8 ray tracing cores, which the B200 SXM6 lacks.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every recorded specification field. The process node differs: 6 nm for Intel versus 5 nm for NVIDIA. Transistor count is 7,200 million versus 208,000 million. Die size is 157 mm² versus 1628 mm². Transistor density is 45.9M per mm² versus 127.8M per mm².

Clock speeds diverge on base and boost. The A380E runs at 2000 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost. The B200 SXM6 runs at 120 MHz base and 1830 MHz boost. Memory clock is 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) for Intel versus 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

Memory capacity is 6 GB GDDR6 versus 180 GB HBM3e. Bus width is 96 bit versus 8192 bit. Bandwidth is 186.0 GB/s versus 8.19 TB/s.

Compute units differ across the board. Shading units: 1,024 versus 18,944. TMUs: 64 versus 592. ROPs: 32 versus 24. RT cores: 8 versus none listed. Tensor cores: none listed versus 592.

Performance rates reflect the hardware. Pixel rate: 64.00 GPixel/s versus 43.92 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 128.0 GTexel/s versus 1,083.4 GTexel/s. FP32: 4.096 TFLOPS versus 69.34 TFLOPS. FP16: 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 69.34 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and physical design: TDP is 75 W versus 1000 W. Slot width is single-slot versus SXM Module. Power connectors are none versus not listed. Suggested PSU is 250 W versus 1400 W. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 6.0 x16. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 2.0 versus no outputs.

API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus N/A. OpenGL 4.6 versus N/A. Vulkan 1.4 versus N/A.

Production status and timing: End-of-life versus active. Release date 2024-03-31 versus 2024-10-31. Predecessors: Xe Graphics versus Server Hopper. Successors: Battlemage versus Server Rubin. The launch MSRP for the B200 SXM6 is 34,999 USD. The A380E has no launch MSRP listed.

The Verdict

The data indicates these GPUs serve entirely different markets with minimal overlap. The Intel Arc A380E is a low-power, display-capable graphics card with a 75 W TDP, 6 GB of GDDR6 memory, and support for consumer graphics APIs. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is a high-power, compute-focused accelerator with a 1000 W TDP, 180 GB of HBM3e, and no display outputs. Their only common ground is the TSMC foundry and a shared release window in 2024.

Benchmark results are absent from the database, so the verdict must rest on specifications alone. The B200 SXM6 dominates in shading units, texture rate, FP32, FP16, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, and tensor core presence. The A380E wins in pixel rate, ROP count, ray tracing cores, display outputs, and power efficiency. Neither product can substitute for the other in its intended role.

The A380E is positioned for graphics and display workloads where its 64.00 GPixel/s fill rate, four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, and 75 W power draw are assets. The B200 SXM6 is positioned for server-side compute where its 69.34 TFLOPS FP32, 592 tensor cores, and 8.19 TB/s memory bandwidth matter more than pixel throughput. The B200's lack of DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support confirms it is not a graphics card in the conventional sense.

The 44x bandwidth advantage and 16.9x FP32 advantage for the B200 SXM6 align with its server accelerator designation. The 46% pixel rate advantage for the A380E, combined with its display outputs, aligns with its graphics card designation. Buyers should select based on workload type: display-driven tasks point to the Intel part, data-center compute points to the NVIDIA part.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Arc A380E advantages: The A380E delivers a higher pixel fill rate at 64.00 GPixel/s versus 43.92 GPixel/s for the B200 SXM6. It has more ROPs (32 versus 24) and includes 8 ray tracing cores where the B200 has none listed. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the B200 lists N/A for all three APIs. It provides four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs versus no outputs on the B200. It draws 75 W compared to 1000 W, requires a 250 W PSU instead of 1400 W, and fits in a single-slot form factor with no external power connectors. Its 2000 MHz locked clock is higher than the B200's 1830 MHz boost clock, and its 6 GB GDDR6 memory is adequate for its display-oriented role.

NVIDIA B200 SXM6 advantages: The B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS FP32, which is 16.9x the A380E's 4.096 TFLOPS. Its FP16 throughput of 69.34 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio exceeds the A380E's 8.192 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio. It has 18,944 shading units versus 1,024, 592 TMUs versus 64, and 592 tensor cores versus none listed on the Intel part. Its texture rate of 1,083.4 GTexel/s is 8.5x higher. Memory capacity is 180 GB versus 6 GB, and bandwidth is 8.19 TB/s versus 186.0 GB/s, a 44x difference. The 8192-bit bus width dwarfs the 96-bit bus on the A380E. It uses PCIe 6.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8, and its 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die represent a 28.9x transistor advantage. It is an active product with a successor named Server Rubin, while the A380E is end-of-life with a Battlemage successor.

The recorded data shows no benchmark wins for either product because no benchmark scores exist. The wins above are derived strictly from specification comparisons. The B200 SXM6 wins in raw compute and memory capacity, while the A380E wins in graphics-specific features and power efficiency.