Intel Arc A380E x2 vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data offers an uneven comparison. The Intel Arc A380E x2 has no benchmark scores listed in the database, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has two recorded results. This absence of data for the Intel part makes direct numerical comparison impossible, yet the NVIDIA card's results can be positioned against its nearest rivals to establish its standing.

The RTX 4000 Ada Generation posts a Geekbench OpenCL score of 146,593 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 123,842. Its average benchmark score across recorded tests is 135,218. That average places the NVIDIA card at the 95th percentile among all GPUs in the database. In contrast, the Intel Arc A380E x2 sits at the 50th percentile, with an average benchmark score of zero due to the lack of recorded tests. The percentile gap, 95 versus 50, indicates that the RTX 4000 Ada Generation resides in the upper tier of the database's performance distribution, while the Intel part occupies the median position solely by default.

Looking at the nearest rivals for the RTX 4000 Ada Generation, the data shows a tightly clustered field. The NVIDIA A10M records an average score of 135,230, which represents a 0 percent delta from the RTX 4000 Ada Generation's 135,218. The AMD Radeon PRO W6800 scores 135,396, a delta of -0.1 percent, meaning it is effectively tied with the RTX card. The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo reaches 135,774, a delta of -0.4 percent, and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 hits 136,472, a delta of -0.9 percent. These small deltas, all within one percentage point, demonstrate that the RTX 4000 Ada Generation trades blows with top-tier workstation cards from the previous generation. The NVIDIA card is not the absolute leader in this group, as the AMD Radeon PRO V620 holds a slight edge, but the differences are minor enough to be considered noise in real-world workloads.

The Intel Arc A380E x2, with no benchmark entries, cannot be placed in any head-to-head comparison. The database simply has no measured performance data for it. What can be stated is that the RTX 4000 Ada Generation's Vulkan score of 123,842 is lower than its OpenCL result of 146,593, a difference of roughly 18 percent within the NVIDIA card's own results. This suggests the card performs better under OpenCL workloads than under Vulkan in the recorded tests, though both numbers are strong absolute scores.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the DG2-128 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist generation, which is listed as Arc 3. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation uses the AD104 chip built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, belonging to the Workstation Ada generation. Both share a common foundry, TSMC, but on different process nodes: the Intel chip uses a 6 nm node, while the NVIDIA chip uses a 5 nm node.

Transistor counts reveal a massive disparity. The Intel DG2-128 packs 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA AD104 contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, resulting in a density of 121.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip holds nearly five times the transistor count and roughly double the die area, with a density advantage of approximately 2.65 times.

Core configurations differ sharply. The Intel Arc A380E x2 provides 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 raster operation units, and 8 ray tracing cores. It has no tensor cores listed. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation delivers 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores. The NVIDIA card offers six times the shading units, three times the TMUs, double the ROPs, and six times the RT cores. The presence of 192 tensor cores on the NVIDIA side versus none on the Intel side is a notable feature gap for AI-accelerated workloads.

Clock behavior also differs. The Intel card runs at a flat 2000 MHz for both base and boost clocks, with no game clock listed. The NVIDIA card has a 1500 MHz base clock and a 2175 MHz boost clock. The Intel card holds a higher constant clock, but the NVIDIA card's boost reaches 175 MHz higher. Memory clocks show the NVIDIA card at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, while the Intel card runs at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded data, the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation wins in every measurable category. Its FP32 compute reaches 26.73 TFLOPS, compared to the Intel card's 4.096 TFLOPS, a factor of roughly 6.5. FP16 performance on the NVIDIA card is also 26.73 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel card delivers 8.192 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The NVIDIA card's FP16 figure is over three times higher.

Memory capacity favors the NVIDIA card substantially. It offers 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 360.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel card provides 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, with 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card has more than triple the capacity and nearly double the bandwidth. For large datasets or high-resolution textures, this is a decisive advantage.

Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern. The NVIDIA card achieves 139.2 GPixel/s and 417.6 GTexel/s, while the Intel card manages 64.00 GPixel/s and 128.0 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA card is roughly 2.2 times faster in pixel throughput and 3.3 times faster in texture throughput.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 does hold advantages in other areas, though not in raw performance. It offers 8 mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, which is double the NVIDIA card's 4 DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The Intel card also supports the newer DisplayPort standard, which could matter for multi-display setups with high refresh rates. Its dimensions are larger, at 265 mm length, 127 mm height, and 20 mm width, versus the NVIDIA card's 245 mm length and 112 mm height with no width listed. The Intel card uses a single 6-pin power connector, while the NVIDIA card uses a single 16-pin connector, though both carry a 130 W TDP and a 300 W suggested PSU.

The NVIDIA card wins on production status as well. It is listed as Active, while the Intel card is End-of-life. The Intel card's successor is Battlemage, and its predecessor is Xe Graphics. The NVIDIA card's predecessor is Workstation Ampere, and its successor is Blackwell PRO W. Release dates show the NVIDIA card launched on August 8, 2023, while the Intel card followed on March 31, 2024.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field. Process node: Intel uses 6 nm, NVIDIA uses 5 nm. Transistors: Intel has 7,200 million, NVIDIA has 35,800 million. Die size: Intel is 157 mm², NVIDIA is 294 mm². Transistor density: Intel is 45.9M per mm², NVIDIA is 121.8M per mm².

Clock speeds: Intel base and boost are both 2000 MHz, NVIDIA base is 1500 MHz and boost is 2175 MHz. Memory clock: Intel is 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective, NVIDIA is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective. Memory size: Intel has 6 GB, NVIDIA has 20 GB. Bus width: Intel is 96-bit, NVIDIA is 160-bit. Bandwidth: Intel is 186.0 GB/s, NVIDIA is 360.0 GB/s.

Shader resources: Intel has 1,024 shading units, NVIDIA has 6,144. TMUs: Intel has 64, NVIDIA has 192. ROPs: Intel has 32, NVIDIA has 64. RT cores: Intel has 8, NVIDIA has 48. Tensor cores: Intel has none, NVIDIA has 192.

Compute rates: Intel FP32 is 4.096 TFLOPS, NVIDIA is 26.73 TFLOPS. FP16: Intel is 8.192 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, NVIDIA is 26.73 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. Pixel rate: Intel is 64.00 GPixel/s, NVIDIA is 139.2 GPixel/s. Texture rate: Intel is 128.0 GTexel/s, NVIDIA is 417.6 GTexel/s.

Power and slots: both have a 130 W TDP and single-slot designs. Power connectors: Intel uses 1x 6-pin, NVIDIA uses 1x 16-pin. Suggested PSU: both are 300 W. Bus interface: Intel is PCIe 4.0 x8, NVIDIA is PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs: Intel has 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0, NVIDIA has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Dimensions: Intel is 265 mm by 127 mm by 20 mm, NVIDIA is 245 mm by 112 mm with no width listed. Production status: Intel is End-of-life, NVIDIA is Active. Release dates: Intel is March 31, 2024, NVIDIA is August 8, 2023. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher benchmark percentile in the database?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation sits at the 95th percentile among all GPUs, while the Intel Arc A380E x2 is at the 50th percentile.

Q: How much memory does each card offer?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference between the two cards?

A: The Intel card delivers 4.096 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the NVIDIA card delivers 26.73 TFLOPS, a difference of approximately 6.5 times in favor of the NVIDIA card.

Q: How does the RTX 4000 Ada Generation compare to its nearest rivals?

A: Its average benchmark score of 135,218 is within 0.9 percent of the NVIDIA A10M, AMD Radeon PRO W6800, AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo, and AMD Radeon PRO V620, with deltas of 0, -0.1, -0.4, and -0.9 percent respectively.

Q: Do both cards use the same power requirements?

A: Yes, both cards have a 130 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 300 W, though the Intel card uses a 6-pin connector while the NVIDIA card uses a 16-pin connector.

Q: Which card has more display outputs?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 has 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: What are the production statuses of the two cards?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 is listed as End-of-life, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation is listed as Active.