Intel Arc A310E vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the Intel Arc A310E and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and neither product has any entries in its own benchmark list. The Intel Arc A310E carries an average benchmark score of zero and a percentile rank of 50 among all GPUs. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile, however, has substantial recorded results across eight separate tests, with an average benchmark score of 8746 and a percentile rank of 44.

The absence of direct comparison data means the only quantitative evaluation possible comes from the NVIDIA card's individual benchmark results and its nearest rival comparisons. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 52998. In Passmark tests, the results vary widely by API generation: DirectX 9 produces a score of 152, DirectX 10 drops to 61, DirectX 11 rises to 94, and DirectX 12 records 55. The Passmark G2D score is 526, while the G3D score reaches 11664. The GPU compute test records 4419.

The nearest rival data for the RTX 3050 A Mobile provides context for its aggregate position. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 posts an average score of 8743, essentially identical with a delta of 0 percent. The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 scores 8686, which is 0.7 percent behind. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X records 8851, placing it 1.2 percent ahead of the RTX 3050 A Mobile. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 scores 8863, a 1.3 percent advantage. These margins are narrow, indicating the RTX 3050 A Mobile sits in a tightly contested performance band despite its modern architecture.

Because the Intel Arc A310E has no benchmark entries and no nearest rivals listed, its performance can only be inferred from its architectural specifications. The raw compute figures provide a starting point: the Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS FP32, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile delivers 4.813 TFLOPS FP32, a difference of roughly 57 percent in favor of NVIDIA. The pixel rate favors NVIDIA at 42.98 GPixel/s versus 32.00 GPixel/s. The texture rate also favors NVIDIA at 75.21 GTexel/s versus 64.00 GTexel/s. These figures suggest the NVIDIA part holds a consistent advantage in raw throughput, but the lack of direct benchmark data prevents confirmation of real-world scaling.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different design philosophies and manufacturing ecosystems. The Intel Arc A310E uses the DG2-128 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, belonging to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. It is manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the GA106 chip on the Ampere architecture, part of the GeForce 30 Mobile generation, and is manufactured on an 8 nm process at Samsung.

Die sizes and transistor counts differ substantially. The Intel chip contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip contains 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die, yielding a density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. The Intel part achieves a higher density on a smaller die, while the NVIDIA part carries roughly 67 percent more transistors overall.

Shader and fixed-function resources diverge sharply. The Arc A310E has 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1792 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Ray tracing hardware also differs: Intel integrates 6 RT cores, while NVIDIA integrates 14 RT cores. NVIDIA additionally includes 56 tensor cores, a feature entirely absent from the Intel specification. The FP16 compute ratio highlights a key architectural split: Intel achieves 6.144 TFLOPS FP16 through a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, while NVIDIA delivers 4.813 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, prioritizing consistent throughput across precisions.

Memory subsystems follow different paths despite matching capacity. Both cards use 4 GB of GDDR6, but the Intel card employs a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the NVIDIA card uses a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clocks differ accordingly: Intel runs at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective, NVIDIA runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective. The wider bus gives NVIDIA a clear bandwidth advantage despite lower clock speeds.

Clock behavior also contrasts. The Intel part lists a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz, indicating a fixed operating point. The NVIDIA part lists a base of 1065 MHz and a boost of 1343 MHz, a dynamic range that allows power management to scale performance. The thermal design power tells a similar story: Intel consumes 75 W, NVIDIA consumes 45 W. NVIDIA achieves higher throughput at lower power, suggesting a more efficient execution resource layout despite the older process node.

Physical and integration differences follow their target markets. The Intel Arc A310E is a single-slot, 168 mm long card with 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, no power connectors, and a suggested power supply of 250 W. The NVIDIA part is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with display outputs described as portable device dependent, no dimensions listed, and no suggested power supply. The Intel card is a discrete add-in board; the NVIDIA part is designed for mobile integration.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and both use a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface. The Intel part is marked as end-of-life with a successor in Battlemage, and it replaced Xe Graphics. The NVIDIA part is also end-of-life, with a predecessor in GeForce 20 Mobile and no successor listed. Release timing places the NVIDIA part earlier, with a recorded release date at the end of 2023, while the Intel part followed in early 2024.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile delivers 4.813 TFLOPS FP32, compared to 3.072 TFLOPS for the Intel Arc A310E, a 57 percent advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare between the two cards?

A: The NVIDIA card offers 192.0 GB/s over a 128-bit bus, while the Intel card offers 124.0 GB/s over a 64-bit bus. NVIDIA holds a 68 GB/s bandwidth advantage.

Q: What are the power consumption figures for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has a TDP of 75 W, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile has a TDP of 45 W. The NVIDIA part consumes 30 W less.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A310E include tensor cores?

A: No. The Intel specification lists no tensor cores. The NVIDIA card includes 56 tensor cores.

Q: How does the RTX 3050 A Mobile compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile averages 8746. The closest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2, scores 8743 with a 0 percent delta. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X leads by 1.2 percent at 8851.

Q: What is the production status of both GPUs?

A: Both the Intel Arc A310E and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile are listed as end-of-life products.

The Verdict

The recorded data points toward a clear separation of roles. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile demonstrates measurable performance in the database, with eight benchmark scores and an average of 8746. Its nearest rivals sit within a tight 1.3 percent band, indicating the card performs at a level consistent with established mid-range parts. The Intel Arc A310E has no recorded benchmark scores at all, so its real-world position cannot be quantified from the database.

On specification alone, the NVIDIA card holds advantages in every compute metric: FP32 throughput, pixel rate, texture rate, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, RT cores, tensor cores, and memory bandwidth. It does so while drawing 30 W less power. The Intel card counters with a smaller die, a more advanced 6 nm process, a higher transistor density, faster clock speeds, and a higher FP16 ratio. The Intel card also exists as a self-contained single-slot solution with fixed display outputs, whereas the NVIDIA part is an IGP dependent on the portable device.

The percentile ranks place the Intel card slightly higher at 50 versus 44, but this percentile is computed without any benchmark data, making it an architectural placeholder rather than an empirical result. The NVIDIA percentile of 44 carries the weight of actual test scores. A user prioritizing verified performance data would select the NVIDIA part. A user prioritizing a compact, low-profile add-in card with modern display outputs and a newer process node would consider the Intel part, but without benchmark evidence to support its performance claims.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Arc A310E | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile |

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

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | Ampere |

| Generation | Alchemist (Arc 3) | GeForce 30 Mobile |

| Process node | 6 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 12,000 million |

| Die size | 157 mm² | 276 mm² |

| Transistor density | 45.9M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base clock | 2000 MHz | 1065 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2000 MHz | 1343 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1937 MHz 15.5 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz 12 Gbps effective |

| Memory bus width | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 124.0 GB/s | 192.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 768 | 1792 |

| TMUs | 32 | 56 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| RT cores | 6 | 14 |

| Tensor cores | None | 56 |

| Pixel rate | 32.00 GPixel/s | 42.98 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 64.00 GTexel/s | 75.21 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.072 TFLOPS | 4.813 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1) | 4.813 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 45 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Display outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions | 168 mm length | Not listed |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | Not listed |

| Release date | 2024-03-31 | 2023-12-31 |

| Predecessor | Xe Graphics | GeForce 20 Mobile |

| Successor | Battlemage | Not listed |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A310E wins in manufacturing efficiency and physical integration. Its 6 nm TSMC process delivers a higher transistor density of 45.9M per mm² versus 43.5M for NVIDIA. Its die is smaller at 157 mm², and its transistor count is lower at 7,200 million. It has a fixed 2000 MHz operating point, which simplifies clock management. It provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs on a single-slot card, making it suitable for multi-display configurations in compact chassis. Its FP16 throughput of 6.144 TFLOPS exceeds the NVIDIA card's 4.813 TFLOPS, giving it an advantage in workloads that use reduced-precision arithmetic. It also has a higher base clock, which may benefit latency-sensitive tasks that cannot scale with boost behavior. Its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface matches the NVIDIA card, so no bandwidth distinction exists there.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile wins in measured performance and efficiency per watt. Its average benchmark score of 8746 is the only validated performance metric in this comparison. Its nearest rivals cluster within 1.3 percent, confirming it operates in a known performance tier. Its FP32 throughput of 4.813 TFLOPS is 57 percent higher than the Intel card. Its pixel rate of 42.98 GPixel/s exceeds the Intel card's 32.00 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 75.21 GTexel/s exceeds the Intel card's 64.00 GTexel/s. It doubles the ROP count and nearly doubles the TMU count. It has more than double the shading units, more than double the RT cores, and adds 56 tensor cores. Its 192.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is 55 percent higher than the Intel card's 124.0 GB/s. It achieves all of this at 45 W, which is 30 W lower than the Intel card's TDP. The NVIDIA part also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning FP16 performance does not drop relative to FP32, a trait useful for consistent compute workloads.