Intel Arc A350M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Comparison

The Intel Arc A350M and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 occupy opposite ends of the hardware spectrum, with the former being a 25 W integrated-class mobile part and the latter a 215 W desktop flagship from an earlier generation. The benchmark data underscores a massive performance gulf, but the comparison reveals more than just raw speed—it highlights architectural priorities, power envelopes, and the trade-offs inherent in each design.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unequivocal. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 2080 scores 91,313 against the Arc A350M’s 24,546, a delta of -73.1% for the Intel part. That means the NVIDIA card delivers roughly 3.7 times the compute throughput in this test. The Vulkan result is even starker: the RTX 2080 hits 107,797 while the Arc A350M manages 24,747, a -77% delta. In relative terms, the RTX 2080 is over four times faster in Vulkan, a margin that reflects the NVIDIA card’s 2,944 shading units versus Intel’s 768, along with its 256-bit memory bus and 448 GB/s bandwidth.

The Arc A350M’s average benchmark score of 24,647 places it at the 70th percentile of all GPUs, which is surprisingly competitive for such a low-power part. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 590 (24,744, -0.4%), the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (24,763, -0.5%), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (24,442, +0.8%). These deltas are all within a single percentage point, meaning the Arc A350M trades blows with mid-range desktop and mobile parts from previous generations, despite its 4 GB memory allocation and 64-bit bus.

The RTX 2080, by contrast, posts an average benchmark score of 22,895, which sits at the 68th percentile—slightly lower than the Arc A350M’s percentile. This seems counterintuitive given its dominant head-to-head wins, but the average includes a broader set of tests, including Passmark scores where the RTX 2080’s DirectX 9 result (223) and DirectX 11 result (158) drag down its aggregate. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Arc B580 (23,021, -0.5%), AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (23,061, -0.7%), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile (22,729, +0.7%). The RTX 2080’s raw compute in OpenCL and Vulkan is exceptional, but its legacy DirectX performance in Passmark is comparatively modest, illustrating that synthetic benchmarks can paint divergent pictures depending on the workload.

In the two head-to-head tests, the RTX 2080 wins both, giving it a 2-0 sweep. The Arc A350M’s best showing is in OpenCL, where its 24,546 score is only 73.1% behind—a smaller gap than the 77% deficit in Vulkan. For a chip with a 25 W TDP, staying within even a 73% margin of a 215 W desktop GPU is notable, but it does not change the fundamental outcome: the RTX 2080 dominates in every measured metric.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 than the Intel Arc A350M in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The RTX 2080 scores 107,797 versus 24,747 for the Arc A350M, making it 77% faster in that specific test. This is the largest margin between the two in any head-to-head benchmark.

Q: Which GPU has a higher overall percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc A350M sits at the 70th percentile, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 is at the 68th percentile. Despite losing both head-to-head tests, the Arc A350M’s average score across its benchmarks places it slightly higher in the percentile distribution.

Q: What are the closest competitors to the Intel Arc A350M in benchmark scores?

A: The Arc A350M’s nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 590 (24,744, -0.4%), NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (24,763, -0.5%), AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (24,442, +0.8%), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (24,277, +1.5%). All are within 1.5% of its average score.

Q: Does the RTX 2080 have any benchmark where it loses to the Arc A350M?

A: No. In the two head-to-head tests—Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan—the RTX 2080 wins both. The Arc A350M records zero wins in this comparison.

Q: How does the RTX 2080’s average score compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Arc B580?

A: The RTX 2080 averages 22,895, which is 0.5% behind the Intel Arc B580’s 23,021. It also trails the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (23,061) by 0.7%, but leads the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile (22,729) by 0.7%.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two GPUs?

A: The Arc A350M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 2080 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 448.0 GB/s—four times the bandwidth.

The Verdict

The data is clear: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 is the superior performer in raw compute benchmarks. It wins both head-to-head tests by margins of 73.1% and 77%, and its Geekbench OpenCL score of 91,313 is nearly four times the Arc A350M’s 24,546. For users prioritizing maximum throughput in OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the RTX 2080 is the obvious choice, provided its 215 W TDP and dual-slot footprint are acceptable.

However, the Arc A350M’s 25 W TDP makes it a compelling option for ultra-portable or low-power systems where the RTX 2080’s 215 W draw is impractical. Its average benchmark score of 24,647 places it at a higher percentile (70th) than the RTX 2080 (68th), and its nearest rivals include desktop parts like the RX 590 and RX 6600 XT, all within 0.8% of its score. This suggests the Arc A350M delivers surprisingly competitive performance per watt, even if its absolute performance is far behind.

Pick the RTX 2080 if you need maximum compute power and have the power budget and physical space for a dual-slot card with a 550 W suggested PSU. Pick the Arc A350M if you are building a compact, power-constrained system and can accept a 73-77% performance deficit in exchange for a 25 W TDP and integrated form factor. The RTX 2080 also offers 8 GB VRAM versus 4 GB, which matters for memory-heavy tasks.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs diverge sharply on nearly every specification. The Arc A350M uses a 6 nm process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, while the RTX 2080 uses a 12 nm process with 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die. Transistor density favors Intel at 45.9M / mm² versus NVIDIA’s 25.0M / mm², reflecting the newer manufacturing node.

Clocks differ significantly: the Arc A350M boosts to 2200 MHz from a 1150 MHz base, while the RTX 2080 boosts to 1710 MHz from a 1515 MHz base. Memory speed is identical at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), but the RTX 2080’s 256-bit bus versus the Arc’s 64-bit bus yields 448.0 GB/s versus 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 2080 has 2,944 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, versus 768, 48, and 24 for the Arc A350M. RT cores are 46 versus 6, and the RTX 2080 adds 368 tensor cores while the Arc has none listed.

Power and physical specs are polar opposites: the Arc A350M draws 25 W and is an IGP, while the RTX 2080 draws 215 W, is dual-slot, requires 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connectors, and suggests a 550 W PSU. The RTX 2080 measures 267 mm in length, 116 mm in height, and 35 mm in width. The Arc A350M’s display outputs are portable-device dependent, while the RTX 2080 offers 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C. Both use PCIe, but the Arc uses 4.0 x8 while the RTX 2080 uses 3.0 x16.

Architecture Differences

Architecturally, the Intel Arc A350M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, part of the Alchemist generation for Arc 3 Mobile. It is fabricated by TSMC on a 6 nm node. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 uses the Turing architecture with the TU104 chip, part of the GeForce 20-series, also fabricated by TSMC but on a 12 nm node.

The Arc A350M’s transistor density of 45.9M / mm² is nearly double the RTX 2080’s 25.0M / mm², a direct consequence of the more advanced process. The RTX 2080 compensates with a much larger die (545 mm² versus 157 mm²) and nearly double the transistor count (13,600 million versus 7,200 million). Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical.

Feature differences are notable: the RTX 2080 includes 368 tensor cores for AI workloads, which the Arc A350M lacks entirely. RT core counts also differ by a factor of nearly 8 (46 versus 6), indicating the RTX 2080 is far better equipped for ray tracing. The Arc A350M’s FP32 throughput is 3.379 TFLOPS, while the RTX 2080 hits 10.07 TFLOPS—a 3x advantage. FP16 performance is similarly lopsided: 6.758 TFLOPS versus 20.14 TFLOPS. The RTX 2080’s pixel rate of 109.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 314.6 GTexel/s dwarf the Arc’s 52.80 GPixel/s and 105.6 GTexel/s. The RTX 2080 also has a larger memory size (8 GB versus 4 GB), a wider bus, and four times the bandwidth, all of which contribute to its dominant benchmark performance.