Intel Arc A350M vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell Comparison

NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell and Intel Arc A350M occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum. The database shows the NVIDIA part as a 140 W desktop workstation card built on a 5 nm process, while the Intel Arc A350M is a 25 W mobile integrated graphics processor (IGP) on a 6 nm node. Their average benchmark scores reflect this gulf: the RTX PRO 4000 scores 27,135, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, while the Arc A350M scores 24,647, sitting in the 70th percentile. Despite the modest percentile gap, the head-to-head data reveals a massive performance chasm, with the NVIDIA card leading by 684.6% in the only shared benchmark.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmarks split cleanly along workload types. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell dominates every category it appears in, with wins across DirectX 10, 11, and 12 tests, plus 2D and 3D Passmark suites. Its strongest showing comes in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 with a score of 4,648, and it posts a massive Geekbench Vulkan score of 194,168. The card also reaches 28,427 in Passmark G3D and 14,805 in GPU compute, making it a clear choice for rendering, compute acceleration, and high-end 3D workloads.

The Intel Arc A350M has no recorded wins in the direct comparison, but its strengths appear in its efficiency profile and portability. With a 25 W TDP and an IGP form factor, it is built for thin-and-light laptops where power draw is the primary constraint. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 24,747 and OpenCL score of 24,546 show it can handle basic 3D tasks and general-purpose compute, but it sits closer to entry-level discrete GPUs like the AMD Radeon RX 590 (which it trails by 0.4%) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (which it leads by 1.5%). For users who need a basic GPU for everyday graphics rather than professional rendering, the Arc A350M is the only option that fits a low-power mobile chassis.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different design philosophies. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell uses the GB203 chip on TSMC's 5 nm process, packing 45,600 million transistors into a 378 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 120.6 million per mm². Its Blackwell 2.0 architecture includes 8,960 shading units, 280 texture mapping units, 96 ROPs, 70 RT cores, and 280 tensor cores. Memory is a 24 GB GDDR7 pool on a 192-bit bus, delivering 672.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The card runs at a 1,230 MHz base clock and 2,055 MHz boost, with memory at 1,750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). It supports PCIe 5.0 x16 and outputs 4x DisplayPort 2.1b.

The Intel Arc A350M uses the DG2-128 chip on TSMC's 6 nm process, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving a density of 45.9 million per mm². Its Xe-HPG architecture (Alchemist generation, Arc 3 Mobile) features 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 6 RT cores, with no tensor core equivalent listed. It has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, providing 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Clocks are 1,150 MHz base and 2,200 MHz boost, with memory at 1,750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). It connects via PCIe 4.0 x8 and relies on portable device dependent display outputs.

The compute capabilities diverge sharply. NVIDIA's FP32 throughput is 36.83 TFLOPS, with FP16 at the same 36.83 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). Intel's FP32 is 3.379 TFLOPS, while FP16 doubles to 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern: NVIDIA hits 197.3 GPixel/s and 575.4 GTexel/s, while Intel manages 52.80 GPixel/s and 105.6 GTexel/s. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but NVIDIA's feature set includes hardware ray tracing and tensor cores, which are absent or unlisted on the Intel part. The NVIDIA card is a single-slot design with a 16-pin connector and a 300 W suggested PSU, while the Intel chip is an IGP with no external power requirement.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split by form factor and use case. For desktop workstations, professional 3D rendering, or high-throughput compute, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell is the only choice between these two. Its 24 GB GDDR7 memory dwarfs the Arc A350M's 4 GB GDDR6, and its 36.83 TFLOPS FP32 performance is roughly 10.9 times higher than the Intel part's 3.379 TFLOPS. The 684.6% lead in Geekbench Vulkan (194,168 vs 24,747) underscores this gap. The NVIDIA card also sits competitively among its nearest rivals: it trails the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT by 1.1% and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile by 1.1%, but beats the NVIDIA RTX A4000 by 1.7% in average score.

For mobile users who need a lightweight, low-power GPU for basic graphics and light 3D, the Intel Arc A350M is the only viable option, but the benchmark data shows it is not a performance part. It scores 24,647 on average, which places it just below the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (by 0.5%) and just above the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (by 0.8%). Its 25 W TDP and IGP form factor mean it cannot be compared on raw performance to a 140 W desktop card. The production statuses also differ: the NVIDIA part is active with a release date of March 17, 2025, while the Intel part is end-of-life with a release date of March 29, 2022. Users who prioritize longevity and professional-grade features should select NVIDIA; users who need an integrated solution for a thin laptop have no other option in this pairing.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher average benchmark scores?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell has an average benchmark score of 27,135, compared to 24,647 for the Intel Arc A350M.

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA card in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell scores 194,168, which is 684.6% higher than the Intel Arc A350M's 24,747.

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs have?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell has 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 192-bit bus with 672.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc A350M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are both GPUs suitable for the same systems?

A: No. The NVIDIA card is a single-slot desktop card with a 16-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU. The Intel Arc A350M is an IGP with no power connector, designed for portable devices.

Q: What is the FP32 performance difference?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell delivers 36.83 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc A350M delivers 3.379 TFLOPS FP32.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), but the NVIDIA card has 70 dedicated RT cores, while the Intel part has 6 RT cores.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark in the database is Geekbench Vulkan, and the result is lopsided. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell scores 194,168, while the Intel Arc A350M scores 24,747, giving NVIDIA a 684.6% advantage. This delta is far larger than the average score difference of 9.2% (27,135 vs 24,647), which suggests the NVIDIA card's architecture scales much better in Vulkan-specific workloads. The Intel part's nearest rival, the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile, scores 24,763, only 0.5% higher, indicating the Arc A350M is firmly in entry-level mobile territory.

Looking at the broader benchmark suite, NVIDIA's wins are consistent across every test where data exists. In Passmark DirectX 10, NVIDIA scores 173 versus no recorded Intel result; in DirectX 11, NVIDIA scores 276; in DirectX 12, NVIDIA scores 97; and in DirectX 9, NVIDIA scores 354. The Passmark G2D and G3D scores for NVIDIA are 1,265 and 28,427, respectively, with a GPU compute score of 14,805. The Intel Arc A350M has no Passmark entries in the database, so its performance in those legacy APIs is unknown. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4,648 for NVIDIA further confirms its high-end positioning.

The average score comparison also places NVIDIA among stronger peers. The RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell trails the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT (27,425) by 1.1% and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile (27,435) by 1.1%, while beating the NVIDIA RTX A4000 (26,683) by 1.7%. The Intel Arc A350M, by contrast, is bracketed by older or lower-tier parts: it trails the AMD Radeon RX 590 (24,744) by 0.4% and the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (24,763) by 0.5%, while leading the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (24,442) by 0.8% and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (24,277) by 1.5%. These deltas show that the Intel part's performance is tightly clustered with mid-range 2019-2021 GPUs, whereas the NVIDIA card sits at the top of the 2025 workstation class. The only area where the Arc A350M shows parity is in API support, with both cards listing DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but the execution gap in Vulkan (684.6%) makes that parity purely nominal.