Intel Arc A310E vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data places these two GPUs in entirely different performance strata. The Intel Arc A310E has no benchmark entries in the database, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB carries an average benchmark score of 4970. That average positions it at the 29th percentile among all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 at 4979 (0.2% ahead) and the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics at 4998 (0.6% ahead). The Arc A310E, by contrast, sits at the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of 0, meaning the database contains no recorded performance measurements for it. The Intel part is marked end-of-life and was released over a year before the NVIDIA card. The data indicates the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB is the only one of the two with measurable performance, and it clusters closely with entry-level integrated graphics in the database, despite its 16 GB memory configuration. The Arc A310E cannot be recommended for any performance role based on the available data, as no test results exist to support a claim of capability.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different foundries and process nodes. Intel uses TSMC at 6 nm for the DG2-128 chip, built on the Xe-HPG architecture from the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. NVIDIA uses TSMC at 5 nm for the GB206 chip, built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture from the GeForce 50-series. Transistor counts differ sharply: the Intel die packs 7,200 million transistors across 157 mm², yielding a density of 45.9M per mm². The NVIDIA die holds 21,900 million transistors across 181 mm², for a density of 121.0M per mm². That is a density advantage of roughly 2.6 times for the NVIDIA chip on a die that is only 24 mm² larger.

Shading resources scale accordingly. The Arc A310E has 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 ROPs, and 6 ray tracing cores. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB has 4608 shading units, 144 TMUs, 48 ROPs, and 36 RT cores. The NVIDIA part also includes 144 tensor cores, a feature the Intel part does not list. Clock behavior differs as well: the Intel GPU runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost, while the NVIDIA GPU boosts from 2407 MHz base to 2572 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part reports FP32 throughput of 23.70 TFLOPS and FP16 of 23.70 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The Intel part reports FP32 of 3.072 TFLOPS and FP16 of 6.144 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, indicating the Intel architecture halves FP16 throughput relative to FP32. Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern: the NVIDIA part reaches 123.5 GPixel/s and 370.4 GTexel/s, while the Intel part reaches 32.00 GPixel/s and 64.00 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture is another major divider. The Arc A310E uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB uses 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. That is four times the capacity and 3.6 times the bandwidth. The memory clock also differs: 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) for Intel versus 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA. The NVIDIA memory runs at a lower base clock but achieves far higher effective data rate due to GDDR7 signaling.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries, and the Intel Arc A310E has zero recorded benchmarks. This makes a conventional comparison impossible. What the data does show is the NVIDIA part's measured performance across eight tests. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 4019. In PassMark, it records 22618 for G3D, 11224 for GPU compute, 1206 for G2D, 238 for DirectX 9, 219 for DirectX 11, 144 for DirectX 10, and 89 for DirectX 12. The DirectX 12 PassMark score of 89 is notably low relative to its own DirectX 9 and DirectX 11 results, which suggests the card's performance varies substantially by API generation in synthetic testing. Its average benchmark score of 4970 places it near the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 (4979, 0.2% behind), the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics (4998, 0.6% behind), and the AMD Radeon R7 M360 (4931, 0.8% ahead). The nearest rival gaps are all under 1%, which indicates the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB's recorded average sits in a tightly packed cluster of older and lower-tier GPUs. The 3DMark Steel Nomad result of 4019 is the only modern DirectX 12 stress test in the set, and it stands apart from the PassMark suite. Since the Arc A310E has no scores, the data cannot show any single benchmark where the Intel part wins or loses. The wins column is empty for both sides.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB has an average benchmark score of 4970. The Intel Arc A310E has an average benchmark score of 0, with no recorded benchmark entries.

Q: How does the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It sits 0.2% behind the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 (4979), 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics (4998), and 0.8% ahead of both the AMD Radeon R7 M360 and AMD Radeon R7 M265 (each at 4931 and 4929 respectively). All nearest rival differences are within 1%.

Q: What are the memory differences between the two cards?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB has 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: Yes, both report DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has a TDP of 75 W and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB has a TDP of 180 W, uses one 8-pin connector, and requires a suggested PSU of 450 W.

Q: Which card has more shading units and ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB has 4608 shading units and 36 RT cores. The Intel Arc A310E has 768 shading units and 6 RT cores.

Where Each One Wins

The data supports only one side in measurable outcomes. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB wins every category where a number exists. It has a higher average benchmark score (4970 versus 0), higher pixel rate (123.5 GPixel/s versus 32.00 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (370.4 GTexel/s versus 64.00 GTexel/s), higher FP32 throughput (23.70 TFLOPS versus 3.072 TFLOPS), and higher FP16 throughput (23.70 TFLOPS versus 6.144 TFLOPS). Its memory capacity is four times larger, its bus width is double, and its bandwidth is 3.6 times higher. It uses a newer process node (5 nm versus 6 nm), a newer architecture (Blackwell 2.0 versus Xe-HPG), and a newer production status (Active versus end-of-life). It also carries 144 tensor cores, a feature class absent from the Intel part's specification list.

The Intel Arc A310E wins in areas of physical footprint and power integration. It is single-slot with no power connectors, a 75 W TDP, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. It measures 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. The NVIDIA card is dual-slot, requires one 8-pin connector, draws 180 W, and needs a 450 W suggested PSU. It measures 241 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The Intel card is also the only one of the two with four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, whereas the NVIDIA card offers one HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1b outputs. The Arc A310E has a higher percentile ranking of 50 versus the NVIDIA card's 29, though this ranking is calculated from an empty benchmark set for the Intel part, so the percentile carries no performance weight. For any workload that relies on measured graphics output, the NVIDIA part is the only one with evidence of capability. For constrained chassis integration with minimal power delivery, the Intel part has the physical and electrical profile.

Specification Differences

Process and die: Intel uses TSMC 6 nm with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die (45.9M per mm²). NVIDIA uses TSMC 5 nm with 21,900 million transistors on a 181 mm² die (121.0M per mm²).

Clocks: Intel runs at 2000 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost. NVIDIA runs at 2407 MHz base and 2572 MHz boost. Memory clock is 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) for Intel and 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

Memory: Intel has 4 GB GDDR6, 64-bit bus, 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA has 16 GB GDDR7, 128-bit bus, 448.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute units: Intel has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, 6 RT cores, no tensor cores. NVIDIA has 4608 shading units, 144 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 36 RT cores, 144 tensor cores.

Throughput: Intel delivers 32.00 GPixel/s, 64.00 GTexel/s, 3.072 TFLOPS FP32, 6.144 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). NVIDIA delivers 123.5 GPixel/s, 370.4 GTexel/s, 23.70 TFLOPS FP32, 23.70 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1).

Power and physical: Intel has 75 W TDP, single-slot, no power connectors, 250 W suggested PSU, 168 mm length, 69 mm height, 20 mm width. NVIDIA has 180 W TDP, dual-slot, one 8-pin connector, 450 W suggested PSU, 241 mm length, 111 mm height, 40 mm width.

Bus and outputs: Intel uses PCIe 4.0 x8 with 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0. NVIDIA uses PCIe 5.0 x8 with 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

Status and release: Intel is end-of-life, released 2024-03-31. NVIDIA is active, released 2025-04-15. The NVIDIA card has a launch MSRP of 429 USD. The Intel card has no recorded launch MSRP.

API support is identical: both report DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.