GPU Comparison

The Intel Arc A580 and NVIDIA P102-100 sit at the same 89th percentile of all GPUs, with average benchmark scores of 57,756 and 57,601 respectively—a gap of only 0.3%. Yet the head-to-head results are far more lopsided: the A580 leads by 84.8% in Geekbench OpenCL and by 21% in Geekbench Vulkan. This analysis examines the architectural and specification differences that explain this divergence, and where each card wins.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A580 has an average benchmark score of 57,756, compared to the NVIDIA P102-100's 57,601, a difference of 0.3% in favor of the A580.

Q: What are the memory capacities and types?

A: The A580 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The P102-100 has 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 320-bit bus with 440.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: The A580 includes 24 ray tracing cores, while the P102-100 has no ray tracing cores at all.

Q: Do both GPUs have display outputs?

A: No. The A580 has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 2.0. The P102-100 has no display outputs.

Q: Which GPU is newer?

A: The A580 was released on 2023-10-09, while the P102-100 was released on 2018-02-11. The A580 is currently Active, while the P102-100 is End-of-life.

Q: What are the DirectX support levels?

A: The A580 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the P102-100 supports DirectX 12 (12_1).

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different eras and design philosophies. The Intel Arc A580 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture (generation "Alchemist (Arc 5)") using a 6 nm process at TSMC, packing 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die. In contrast, the NVIDIA P102-100 uses the Pascal architecture (generation "Mining GPUs") on a 16 nm process, with 11,800 million transistors on a 471 mm² die. The A580's transistor density is 53.4M per mm², more than double the P102-100's 25.1M per mm².

Clock speeds also differ. The A580 runs at a base of 1700 MHz and boosts to 2000 MHz, while the P102-100 operates at 1582 MHz base and 1683 MHz boost. Memory clocks are similarly divergent: the A580's GDDR6 runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), whereas the P102-100's GDDR5X runs at 1376 MHz (11 Gbps effective). The A580's memory interface is 256-bit with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth; the P102-100 uses a 320-bit bus but achieves only 440.3 GB/s.

Compute resources differ in raw counts. The A580 has 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The P102-100 has 3200 shading units, 200 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. However, the A580 adds 24 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent on the P102-100. Pixel and texture rates reflect this: the A580 delivers 192.0 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s, versus 134.6 GPixel/s and 336.6 GTexel/s for the P102-100. FP32 throughput is 12.29 TFLOPS on the A580 against 10.77 TFLOPS on the P102-100. FP16 performance is starkly different: the A580 offers 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the P102-100 manages only 168.3 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio).

Power and connectivity also separate them. The A580 has a TDP of 175 W and a suggested PSU of 450 W; the P102-100 draws 250 W and requires a 600 W PSU. Both use dual-slot designs and 2x 8-pin power connectors, but the bus interface differs: the A580 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the P102-100 uses PCIe 1.0 x4. Display outputs are exclusive to the A580—the P102-100 has none. API support: both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the A580 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus the P102-100's DirectX 12 (12_1). The P102-100 is end-of-life; the A580 remains active.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head benchmark data shows only one winner. The A580 wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan tests, with no wins for the P102-100. In addition to these direct tests, the A580 holds advantages in pixel rate, texture rate, FP32, and FP16 throughput. Its higher memory bandwidth and modern architecture contribute to these wins.

The P102-100 does have more shading units (3200 vs 3072) and more TMUs (200 vs 192), but this does not translate into any measured performance advantage. The card belongs to the "Mining GPUs" generation and lacks display outputs, limiting its use to compute workloads without any video output. The A580, by contrast, is a general-purpose GPU with full display connectivity and ray tracing support.

In practical terms, the A580 is the superior choice for any workload that requires graphics output, modern API features, or high compute throughput. The P102-100's only distinguishing characteristics are its higher shading unit count and its 320-bit memory bus, but neither yields a benchmark win.

Specification Differences

| Feature | Intel Arc A580 | NVIDIA P102-100 |

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

| Process node | 6 nm | 16 nm |

| Transistors | 21,700 million | 11,800 million |

| Die size | 406 mm² | 471 mm² |

| Transistor density | 53.4M / mm² | 25.1M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1700 MHz | 1582 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2000 MHz | 1683 MHz |

| Memory clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 1376 MHz (11 Gbps effective) |

| Memory size | 8 GB | 5 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5X |

| Memory bus width | 256 bit | 320 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 440.3 GB/s |

| Shading units | 3072 | 3200 |

| TMUs | 192 | 200 |

| ROPs | 96 | 80 |

| Ray tracing cores | 24 | 0 |

| Pixel rate | 192.0 GPixel/s | 134.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 384.0 GTexel/s | 336.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 12.29 TFLOPS | 10.77 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) | 168.3 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | 175 W | 250 W |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 600 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x4 |

| Display outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0 | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Release date | 2023-10-09 | 2018-02-11 |

| Production status | Active | End-of-life |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two available direct comparisons show a decisive A580 advantage. In Geekbench OpenCL, the A580 scores 91,657 against the P102-100's 49,602—a delta of 84.8% in favor of the A580. This is a massive gap, far larger than the 14% difference in FP32 peak throughput (12.29 vs 10.77 TFLOPS). The A580's superior memory bandwidth (512.0 vs 440.3 GB/s) and newer architecture likely contribute to this outcome, though the data alone does not isolate the cause.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the A580 scores 79,381 versus 65,600 for the P102-100, a 21% lead. This narrower gap still places the A580 clearly ahead. The A580's Vulkan result is 13.4% lower than its OpenCL score, while the P102-100's Vulkan score is 32.3% higher than its OpenCL result—suggesting the Pascal architecture handles Vulkan relatively better than OpenCL, but still cannot overcome the A580's overall performance edge.

These head-to-head results align with the aggregate data. The A580's average benchmark score is 57,756, and the P102-100's is 57,601, a 0.3% difference. However, the two direct tests show a much wider margin, indicating that the average score is pulled by other benchmarks where the P102-100 may perform closer. Still, in the only tests where both cards are measured identically, the A580 wins decisively.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner. The Intel Arc A580 outperforms the NVIDIA P102-100 in every head-to-head benchmark, offers ray tracing, includes display outputs, supports newer DirectX features, and is built on a far more modern process node. It also consumes less power (175 W vs 250 W) and requires a smaller PSU (450 W vs 600 W). The P102-100, with its end-of-life status, lack of display outputs, and older Pascal architecture, cannot match the A580's performance or feature set.

For any user seeking a GPU for gaming, content creation, or general compute with display output, the A580 is the only reasonable choice. The P102-100's higher shading unit count and wider memory bus do not translate into a single benchmark win. While the average scores are nearly identical, the head-to-head results show that the A580 is the superior card in practice. The verdict is unambiguous: the Intel Arc A580 is the better GPU.