Intel Arc A370M vs NVIDIA RTX A4000 Comparison

Intel Arc A370M and NVIDIA RTX A4000 occupy different tiers of the GPU landscape, and the benchmark data reflects that separation clearly. The RTX A4000 dominates the two available head-to-head comparisons, while the Arc A370M shows competitive positioning only against its own nearest rivals in the lower-performance segment. This analysis draws exclusively from the provided specification and benchmark data to outline where each card stands.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Intel Arc A370M scores 29,676 against the NVIDIA RTX A4000’s 105,739, a delta of -71.9% in favor of the NVIDIA card. The margin is even larger in Geekbench Vulkan: the Arc A370M posts 28,673 while the RTX A4000 reaches 127,645, a -77.5% difference. These are not close contests; the RTX A4000 delivers between 3.5x and 4.5x the raw compute throughput in these synthetic workloads.

What makes these numbers meaningful is how each card performs relative to its own peer group. The Arc A370M’s average benchmark score is 29,175, placing it at the 74th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, scores 29,197 (a -0.1% delta), meaning the two are effectively tied. The Arc A370M also sits within 1% of the AMD FirePro W8000 and 0.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 470. Notably, it edges out the AMD Radeon RX 6800M by 1% — a surprising result given the RX 6800M’s higher-tier positioning, but the data shows the Arc A370M holding its own in this specific aggregate metric.

The RTX A4000, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 26,683 — lower than the Arc A370M’s average, despite winning both head-to-head tests. This is because the RTX A4000’s average is dragged down by its inclusion of legacy DirectX 9, 10, and 11 PassMark results (scores of 240, 126, and 158, respectively), which are far below its modern workload scores. Its 72nd percentile ranking reflects this mixed bag. Against its nearest rivals, the RTX A4000 leads the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary by 0.5%, the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 by 1%, the AMD Radeon 860M by 1.1%, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 by 1.3%. These are tight margins, indicating that in aggregate performance, the RTX A4000 is competitive but not dominant within its own bracket.

The takeaway from the head-to-head data is that the RTX A4000 is in a different performance class for modern compute APIs, while the Arc A370M’s aggregate score benefits from consistent performance across a narrower set of benchmarks. The Vulkan gap of 77.5% is particularly instructive, as it suggests the RTX A4000’s architecture scales far better with low-level graphics APIs.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The Intel Arc A370M uses the DG2-128 chip based on Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist (Arc 3 Mobile) generation, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It packs 7,200 million transistors into a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9M / mm². The NVIDIA RTX A4000 uses the GA104 chip based on Ampere architecture, from the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) generation, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It contains 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die, with a density of 44.4M / mm². The Intel chip is smaller and denser, but the NVIDIA chip has more than twice the transistor count and die area.

The compute resources differ dramatically. The Arc A370M has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 8 ray tracing cores, and no tensor cores. The RTX A4000 has 6,144 shading units (6x more), 192 TMUs (3x more), 96 ROPs (3x more), 48 ray tracing cores (6x more), and 192 tensor cores. These raw counts translate directly into throughput: the Arc A370M delivers 4.198 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.397 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio), while the RTX A4000 delivers 19.17 TFLOPS FP32 and 19.17 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). The NVIDIA card has over 4.5x the FP32 throughput and over 2x the FP16 throughput, with FP16 at full rate rather than half rate.

Memory subsystems are equally divergent. The Arc A370M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, providing 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A4000 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s — four times the capacity and exactly four times the bandwidth. Both run memory at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed, so the difference comes entirely from bus width. The pixel rate of the RTX A4000 is 149.8 GPixel/s versus 65.60 GPixel/s for the Arc A370M, and texture rates are 299.5 GTexel/s versus 131.2 GTexel/s.

Power and physical specifications also tell a story. The Arc A370M is rated at 35 W TDP and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no dedicated power connectors and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The RTX A4000 is a 140 W single-slot card requiring a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU, using a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface. The display outputs differ: the Arc A370M is “Portable Device Dependent” while the RTX A4000 has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy. For any workload that leverages modern compute APIs — as measured by Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan — the NVIDIA RTX A4000 is the superior choice by a wide margin. The 71.9% and 77.5% leads in those tests are decisive, and the RTX A4000’s 19.17 TFLOPS FP32 versus 4.198 TFLOPS for the Arc A370M reinforces this gap. The RTX A4000 also offers 16 GB of memory versus 4 GB, and 448 GB/s bandwidth versus 112 GB/s, making it suitable for larger datasets and higher-resolution textures.

However, the Arc A370M is not without merit in its own context. Its 74th percentile ranking is higher than the RTX A4000’s 72nd percentile, and its average benchmark score of 29,175 exceeds the RTX A4000’s 26,683. This is because the Arc A370M’s benchmarks are limited to modern APIs where it performs consistently, while the RTX A4000’s average is penalized by poor legacy DirectX 9/10/11 scores. If the workload is strictly modern and the RTX A4000’s legacy results are excluded, the NVIDIA card pulls far ahead; if the comparison is purely on aggregate score, the Arc A370M actually wins.

For a buyer choosing between these two, the decision hinges on workload. The RTX A4000 is the clear pick for compute-heavy tasks, ray tracing, or memory-intensive applications — its 48 ray tracing cores, 192 tensor cores, and 16 GB frame buffer are substantial advantages. The Arc A370M, at 35 W TDP and IGP form factor, is suited for low-power mobile systems where the RTX A4000’s 140 W power draw and single-slot footprint are impractical. The RTX A4000’s 300 W suggested PSU requirement also limits its deployment to desktops with adequate power delivery, whereas the Arc A370M has no such requirement.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs, based solely on the FACT PACK data:

• Chip: DG2-128 (Intel) vs GA104 (NVIDIA)
• Architecture: Xe-HPG vs Ampere
• Generation: Alchemist (Arc 3 Mobile) vs Workstation Ampere (Ax000)
• Process Node: 6 nm (TSMC) vs 8 nm (Samsung)
• Transistors: 7,200 million vs 17,400 million
• Die Size: 157 mm² vs 392 mm²
• Transistor Density: 45.9M / mm² vs 44.4M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1550 MHz vs 735 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2050 MHz vs 1560 MHz
• Memory Size: 4 GB vs 16 GB
• Memory Bus Width: 64 bit vs 256 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 112.0 GB/s vs 448.0 GB/s
• Shading Units: 1024 vs 6144
• TMUs: 64 vs 192
• ROPs: 32 vs 96
• Ray Tracing Cores: 8 vs 48
• Tensor Cores: None vs 192
• Pixel Rate: 65.60 GPixel/s vs 149.8 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 131.2 GTexel/s vs 299.5 GTexel/s
• FP32: 4.198 TFLOPS vs 19.17 TFLOPS
• FP16: 8.397 TFLOPS (2:1) vs 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 35 W vs 140 W
• Slot Width: IGP vs Single-slot
• Power Connectors: None vs 1x 6-pin
• Suggested PSU: None vs 300 W
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 vs PCIe 4.0 x16
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent vs 4x DisplayPort 1.4a
• Dimensions: Not specified vs 241 mm (9.5 inches) length, 112 mm (4.4 inches) height
• Release Date: 2022-03-29 vs 2021-04-11
• Predecessor: None vs Quadro Turing
• Successor: None vs Workstation Ada

Fields that are identical include memory type (GDDR6), memory clock (1750 MHz / 14 Gbps effective), API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4), and production status (End-of-life).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A370M has an average benchmark score of 29,175, which is higher than the NVIDIA RTX A4000’s 26,683.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap between the two?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the NVIDIA RTX A4000 scores 127,645 versus the Intel Arc A370M’s 28,673, a 77.5% advantage for the NVIDIA card.

Q: Does the RTX A4000 have more memory bandwidth?

A: Yes, the RTX A4000 provides 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth from its 256-bit bus, which is four times the 112.0 GB/s of the Arc A370M’s 64-bit bus.

Q: What is the transistor density of each chip?

A: The Intel DG2-128 chip has a density of 45.9M / mm² on its 157 mm² die, while the NVIDIA GA104 chip has a density of 44.4M / mm² on its 392 mm² die.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing cores?

A: Both do. The Intel Arc A370M has 8 ray tracing cores, while the NVIDIA RTX A4000 has 48 ray tracing cores.

Q: Are both GPUs end-of-life?

A: Yes, the production status for both the Intel Arc A370M and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 is listed as End-of-life.