Intel Arc A380E vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data available for this comparison is one-sided. The Intel Arc A380E has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB has a full suite of results across DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, and compute workloads. This means the comparison must rely on the RTX 3050 6 GB's measured performance and the architectural specifications of both cards.

The RTX 3050 6 GB delivers an average benchmark score of 2329 across all recorded tests. Its percentile ranking against all GPUs is 15, which places it in the lower portion of the performance distribution. The nearest rivals in the database show how tightly grouped this performance level is. The GeForce GT 640M scores 2335, a delta of -0.3 percent relative to the RTX 3050 6 GB. The Quadro P620 scores 2339, a delta of -0.4 percent. The Intel HD Graphics 510 scores 2305, which is 1 percent higher than the RTX 3050 6 GB. The GeForce GT 550M scores 2363, a delta of -1.4 percent. These deltas are all within 1.4 percent, indicating that the RTX 3050 6 GB sits in a cluster of older or lower-end GPUs with nearly identical average scores.

Looking at the individual benchmark results for the RTX 3050 6 GB, the strongest showing is in PassMark G3D with a score of 10738. The weakest is PassMark DirectX 12 with a score of 53. The DirectX 9 result is 124, DirectX 10 is 59, DirectX 11 is 72, and GPU compute is 5192. The PassMark G2D score is 882. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result is 1515.

The Arc A380E cannot be measured against these numbers directly because the database contains no benchmark entries for it. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and its percentile versus all GPUs is 50, a placeholder rank that does not reflect measured performance. The wins count is 0 for the Arc A380E and 0 for the RTX 3050 6 GB in head-to-head tests, because no direct comparison benchmarks exist in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3050 6 GB wins in every measurable category because it is the only card with recorded performance data. Its compute throughput is substantial. The FP32 rating is 6.774 TFLOPS, and the FP16 rating is also 6.774 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning there is no half-rate penalty for FP16 workloads. This is useful for compute tasks that rely on FP16, such as certain machine learning inference workloads or shader-based effects that use half precision.

The Arc A380E has an FP32 rating of 4.096 TFLOPS and an FP16 rating of 8.192 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The FP16 number is higher in absolute terms than the RTX 3050 6 GB's FP16 figure, but the 2:1 ratio indicates that FP16 throughput is achieved by pairing FP32 units, not by dedicated half-rate hardware. In mixed workloads that use FP32, the RTX 3050 6 GB has a clear advantage: 6.774 TFLOPS against 4.096 TFLOPS, which is roughly 65 percent higher.

Texture and pixel throughput also favor the RTX 3050 6 GB in raw terms. The RTX 3050 6 GB has a texture rate of 105.8 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 47.04 GPixel/s. The Arc A380E has a texture rate of 128.0 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 64.00 GPixel/s. Here the Arc A380E is ahead: 128.0 GTexel/s versus 105.8 GTexel/s for texture fill, and 64.00 GPixel/s versus 47.04 GPixel/s for pixel fill. This suggests that the Arc A380E's smaller shading unit count is offset by higher clocks, since its base and boost clocks are both 2000 MHz, while the RTX 3050 6 GB runs at a 1042 MHz base and 1470 MHz boost.

Memory bandwidth slightly favors the Arc A380E. It has 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth from 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with an effective memory clock of 15.5 Gbps. The RTX 3050 6 GB has 168.0 GB/s from 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with an effective memory clock of 14 Gbps. The Arc A380E's bandwidth advantage is 18.0 GB/s, about 10.7 percent higher.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB has 2304 shading units. The Intel Arc A380E has 1024 shading units.

Q: What is the FP32 performance difference?

A: The RTX 3050 6 GB delivers 6.774 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The Arc A380E delivers 4.096 TFLOPS. The RTX 3050 6 GB is approximately 65 percent higher in FP32 throughput.

Q: Do both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Yes. Both the Intel Arc A380E and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which card has more ray tracing cores?

A: The RTX 3050 6 GB has 18 ray tracing cores. The Arc A380E has 8 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each card?

A: Both cards have 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus. The Arc A380E has a bandwidth of 186.0 GB/s with a 15.5 Gbps effective memory clock. The RTX 3050 6 GB has a bandwidth of 168.0 GB/s with a 14 Gbps effective memory clock.

Q: What is the TDP of each card?

A: The Arc A380E has a TDP of 75 W. The RTX 3050 6 GB has a TDP of 70 W. Both suggest a 250 W power supply.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every core specification. The RTX 3050 6 GB uses the GA107 chip built on Samsung's 8 nm process, with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. The Arc A380E uses the DG2-128 chip built on TSMC's 6 nm process, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The transistor density is close: 45.9M per mm² for the Arc A380E versus 43.5M per mm² for the RTX 3050 6 GB.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The Arc A380E runs at a 2000 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost. The RTX 3050 6 GB runs at 1042 MHz base and 1470 MHz boost. The Arc A380E's fixed 2000 MHz clock is much higher than the RTX 3050 6 GB's boost clock.

The shading unit count heavily favors the RTX 3050 6 GB at 2304 versus 1024 for the Arc A380E. TMUs also favor the RTX 3050 6 GB: 72 versus 64. ROPs are equal at 32 for both. Ray tracing cores favor the RTX 3050 6 GB at 18 versus 8. The RTX 3050 6 GB also has 72 tensor cores, while the Arc A380E has none listed.

Memory bandwidth favors the Arc A380E at 186.0 GB/s versus 168.0 GB/s, even though both use 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus. The effective memory clock differs: 15.5 Gbps for the Arc A380E, 14 Gbps for the RTX 3050 6 GB.

Physical dimensions differ. The Arc A380E is 254 mm long, 127 mm tall, and 20 mm wide, and it is a single-slot card. The RTX 3050 6 GB is 242 mm long and 112 mm tall, with no width listed, and it is a dual-slot card. Neither card requires power connectors. Display outputs differ: the Arc A380E has 4x DisplayPort 2.0, while the RTX 3050 6 GB has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

The RTX 3050 6 GB has a launch MSRP of 179 USD. The Arc A380E has no launch MSRP recorded. Release dates differ by about two months: the RTX 3050 6 GB was released on 2024-02-01, and the Arc A380E on 2024-03-31. Both are end-of-life products.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc A380E uses the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, and belongs to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB uses the Ampere architecture with the GA107 chip and belongs to the GeForce 30 series. These are fundamentally different designs from different vendors, built on different processes: TSMC 6 nm for Intel, Samsung 8 nm for NVIDIA.

The process node difference is significant. TSMC's 6 nm process allows Intel to pack 7,200 million transistors into a 157 mm² die, yielding a density of 45.9M per mm². Samsung's 8 nm process yields 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, a density of 43.5M per mm². The Arc A380E is the denser chip despite having fewer total transistors.

The compute architectures diverge in how they handle FP16. The Arc A380E uses a 2:1 FP16 ratio, meaning it can double FP16 throughput relative to FP32. The RTX 3050 6 GB uses a 1:1 ratio, meaning FP16 throughput equals FP32 throughput. This is a critical difference for workloads that use FP16 heavily, as the Arc A380E's FP16 rating of 8.192 TFLOPS exceeds the RTX 3050 6 GB's 6.774 TFLOPS. However, for FP32 workloads, the RTX 3050 6 GB is the stronger card.

Tensor core support is exclusive to the RTX 3050 6 GB, which has 72 tensor cores. The Arc A380E has no tensor cores listed. Ray tracing hardware also differs: 18 RT cores on the RTX 3050 6 GB versus 8 on the Arc A380E. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate, so the API feature set is nominally equivalent on paper, but the underlying hardware resources are quite different.

The memory subsystems are similar in capacity and bus width but differ in clock speed. The Arc A380E runs its GDDR6 at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective throughput, while the RTX 3050 6 GB runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective. This gives the Arc A380E 186.0 GB/s versus 168.0 GB/s for the RTX 3050 6 GB.

The predecessor and successor chains show different product trajectories. The Arc A380E's predecessor is Xe Graphics, and its successor is Battlemage. The RTX 3050 6 GB's predecessor is GeForce 20, and its successor is GeForce 40. The Arc A380E is part of Intel's first discrete GPU generation, while the RTX 3050 6 GB is a lower-end addition to NVIDIA's established 30-series lineup.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a clear split between the two cards. The RTX 3050 6 GB is the only one with actual benchmark scores, and those scores place it at the 15th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 2329. Its nearest rivals are all within 1.4 percent of that score, which means it performs in the same range as the GeForce GT 640M, Quadro P620, Intel HD Graphics 510, and GeForce GT 550M. That is not a high-performance tier, but it is a measured, functional one.

The Arc A380E has no recorded benchmark scores, no average score, and no nearest rivals. Its percentile of 50 is a neutral placeholder. The only quantitative comparison available comes from specifications. On paper, the Arc A380E has higher clocks, higher texture and pixel fill rates, and higher memory bandwidth. The RTX 3050 6 GB has far more shading units, more ray tracing cores, tensor cores, and higher FP32 throughput.

For buyers who prioritize FP32 compute, the RTX 3050 6 GB is the better choice based on the 6.774 TFLOPS figure. For workloads that use FP16, the Arc A380E's 8.192 TFLOPS rating is higher, but the 2:1 ratio and lack of tensor cores mean it is not a direct substitute for the RTX 3050 6 GB's 1:1 FP16 with tensor core acceleration.

For raw fill rate, the Arc A380E has the advantage: 128.0 GTexel/s and 64.00 GPixel/s versus 105.8 GTexel/s and 47.04 GPixel/s. This could matter in resolution-limited or fill-bound scenarios, but there is no benchmark data to confirm real-world impact.

The practical verdict from the database is that the RTX 3050 6 GB is the only card with demonstrated performance, and its measured results place it in a modest performance tier. The Arc A380E remains an unknown in terms of measured output. Anyone choosing between these two should treat the RTX 3050 6 GB's benchmark scores as the only verified evidence of performance, while the Arc A380E's specifications suggest it can compete in specific areas like memory bandwidth and fill rate, but without recorded results, those advantages are unconfirmed.