Intel Arc A380E vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for the Intel Arc A380E versus the NVIDIA N1 20SM. Both products have zero benchmark scores, zero wins, and zero average benchmark scores. The percentile fields show both at the 50th percentile against all GPUs, which indicates a neutral position in the overall distribution, though neither has actual measured data to substantiate a performance ranking.

The absence of benchmark results means the comparison must rely entirely on the specification sheets. The NVIDIA N1 20SM delivers 12.01 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is approximately three times the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc A380E. In raw floating-point throughput, the NVIDIA part holds a clear mathematical advantage. The texture rate differential is even more pronounced: the N1 20SM sustains 375.4 GTexel/s against 128.0 GTexel/s for the Arc A380E, a factor of roughly 2.9.

Pixel throughput tells a different story. The Intel Arc A380E reaches 64.00 GPixel/s, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM records 56.30 GPixel/s. This gives the Intel part an 8.7% advantage in pixel fill rate, a narrow but measurable lead. The NVIDIA part counters with a 256-bit memory bus and 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth, versus the Intel part's 96-bit bus and 186.0 GB/s. The bandwidth gap is 46.9%, a substantial margin for memory-bound workloads.

Clock behavior diverges sharply. The Intel Arc A380E runs at a fixed 2000 MHz for both base and boost, with no dynamic range. The NVIDIA N1 20SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz, a 216.6% lift from base to boost. The NVIDIA part's boost clock is 17.3% higher than the Intel part's constant clock, but its base clock is 63% lower. This suggests the NVIDIA design relies heavily on power and thermal headroom to reach peak performance, while the Intel part operates at a steady state.

Memory capacity is the largest single difference. The NVIDIA N1 20SM carries 128 GB of LPDDR5X, while the Intel Arc A380E has 6 GB of GDDR6. The capacity ratio is 21.3 to 1. The memory type also differs: GDDR6 on the Intel side, LPDDR5X on the NVIDIA side. Effective memory speed favors Intel at 15.5 Gbps versus 8.5 Gbps, but the NVIDIA part's wider bus compensates with higher total bandwidth.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM delivers 12.01 TFLOPS, which is 2.93 times the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc A380E.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, providing 273.2 GB/s. The Intel Arc A380E uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, providing 186.0 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU has the higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Intel Arc A380E leads with 64.00 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA N1 20SM, a difference of 7.70 GPixel/s in favor of Intel.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM boosts to 2346 MHz. The Intel Arc A380E has a fixed 2000 MHz clock for both base and boost, meaning no boost range exists.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM has 2560 shading units, while the Intel Arc A380E has 1024. The NVIDIA part has 1536 more shading units.

Q: What is the production status of each product?

A: The Intel Arc A380E is end-of-life, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM is active production.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc A380E is built on the Xe-HPG architecture under the Alchemist generation, specifically the Arc 3 tier. Its chip is designated DG2-128. The NVIDIA N1 20SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture under the Blackwell IGP generation, with the chip designated GB20B. These are fundamentally different design philosophies: Intel's part is a discrete GPU architecture repurposed for embedded or low-power use, while NVIDIA's part is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) built for a system-on-chip context.

The process nodes differ. Intel uses a 6 nm process from TSMC, while NVIDIA uses a 5 nm process from the same foundry. Transistor counts are not directly comparable because NVIDIA's transistor count is unknown in the database. Intel's die size is 157 mm² with a transistor density of 45.9M per mm², totaling 7,200 million transistors. NVIDIA's die size is 382 mm², which is 2.43 times larger, but without a transistor count, density cannot be calculated.

Ray tracing hardware exists on both. The Intel Arc A380E has 8 RT cores, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM has 20 RT cores. Tensor cores appear only on the NVIDIA side, with 80 tensor cores; the Intel part has no tensor core field in the database. The NVIDIA part also leads in texture mapping units at 160 versus 64, and in shading units at 2560 versus 1024. The Intel part has more ROPs at 32 versus 24.

API support differs completely. The Intel Arc A380E supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1 20SM has no supported APIs listed: DirectX is N/A, OpenGL is N/A, and Vulkan is N/A. This reflects the NVIDIA part's IGP positioning, likely targeting a fixed-function or proprietary software stack rather than general-purpose graphics APIs.

The NVIDIA part uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the Intel part uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The NVIDIA interface has double the lane count and a newer generation, providing more host bandwidth potential. Display outputs also differ: the Intel part provides 4x DisplayPort 2.0, while the NVIDIA part provides a single HDMI output.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ across nearly every specification field. The process node: Intel at 6 nm, NVIDIA at 5 nm. Transistors: Intel at 7,200 million, NVIDIA unknown. Die size: Intel at 157 mm², NVIDIA at 382 mm². Base clock: Intel at 2000 MHz, NVIDIA at 741 MHz. Boost clock: Intel at 2000 MHz, NVIDIA at 2346 MHz. Memory clock: Intel at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective), NVIDIA at 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective).

Memory size: Intel at 6 GB, NVIDIA at 128 GB. Memory type: GDDR6 versus LPDDR5X. Bus width: 96 bit versus 256 bit. Bandwidth: 186.0 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s. Shading units: 1024 versus 2560. TMUs: 64 versus 160. ROPs: 32 versus 24. RT cores: 8 versus 20. Tensor cores: none versus 80.

Pixel rate: 64.00 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 128.0 GTexel/s versus 375.4 GTexel/s. FP32: 4.096 TFLOPS versus 12.01 TFLOPS. FP16: Intel at 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), NVIDIA at 12.01 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). The FP16 ratio difference means Intel rates its FP16 at twice the FP32 rate, while NVIDIA rates FP16 and FP32 identically at 1:1.

TDP: Intel at 75 W, NVIDIA unknown. Slot width: Intel is single-slot, NVIDIA is IGP. Power connectors: none on either. Suggested PSU: Intel at 250 W, NVIDIA has none listed. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs: 4x DisplayPort 2.0 versus 1x HDMI.

Dimensions: Intel measures 254 mm in length, 127 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. NVIDIA has no dimensions listed, consistent with an integrated package. Release dates differ by over two years: Intel released in March 2024, NVIDIA releases in May 2026. Production status: Intel is end-of-life, NVIDIA is active. The Intel part lists a predecessor (Xe Graphics) and successor (Battlemage); the NVIDIA part lists neither.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380E wins in pixel fill rate with 64.00 GPixel/s, a 7.70 GPixel/s margin over the NVIDIA part's 56.30 GPixel/s. It also wins in effective memory speed at 15.5 Gbps versus 8.5 Gbps, and in memory clock at 1937 MHz versus 1067 MHz. The Intel part has more ROPs (32 versus 24), which supports its pixel throughput advantage. It also has a defined TDP of 75 W, making its power envelope explicit, and it supports a full modern graphics API stack including DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs give it a multi-display advantage over the single HDMI on the NVIDIA part. The Intel part is also smaller in die area at 157 mm² versus 382 mm².

The NVIDIA N1 20SM wins in compute throughput with 12.01 TFLOPS FP32, approximately three times the Intel part. It wins in texture rate at 375.4 GTexel/s, nearly three times the Intel figure. It has more shading units (2560 versus 1024), more TMUs (160 versus 64), more RT cores (20 versus 8), and 80 tensor cores where Intel has none. Memory bandwidth is higher at 273.2 GB/s, and memory capacity is vastly larger at 128 GB versus 6 GB. The NVIDIA part uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, double the lanes and a newer generation than Intel's PCIe 4.0 x8. Its boost clock of 2346 MHz is higher than Intel's fixed 2000 MHz.

The use-case split follows these strengths. The Intel Arc A380E suits workloads that emphasize pixel processing, multi-display output, and standard graphics API compatibility. Its fixed 2000 MHz clock and 75 W TDP suggest predictable behavior without boost variability. The NVIDIA N1 20SM suits compute-heavy tasks, large memory footprints, and tensor-accelerated workloads. Its 128 GB memory capacity is an order of magnitude beyond the Intel part, which matters for models or datasets that exceed 6 GB. The NVIDIA part's 1:1 FP16 ratio means no throughput gain from using half precision, whereas Intel's 2:1 ratio doubles FP16 output, giving Intel an efficiency edge in mixed-precision scenarios.

The production status reinforces the split. Intel's part is end-of-life, while NVIDIA's is active. The NVIDIA part has a later release date and a larger die, consistent with a newer, more complex design. The Intel part remains relevant for legacy or embedded deployments where its established API support and multi-display capability are required. The database records no overlapping benchmarks, so these conclusions derive from the specification sheets alone.