Intel Arc A580 VS Arc A750
We are comparing the Intel Arc A580 (Intel) with the Arc A750 (Intel). Scroll down to the pros and cons of each graphics card, in-depth specs, and gaming benchmarks.
Last Updated: September 22, 2026
Overall Comparison
KEY DIFFERENCES OF Intel Arc A580 AND Arc A750
Here’s how Intel Arc A580 and Arc A750 stack up against each other in their most impactful areas.
Why Arc A750 is the best choice:
-
14% higher 4K Ultra FPS (32 vs 28)
-
16% higher 1440p Ultra FPS (59 vs 51)
-
13% higher 1080p Ultra FPS (79 vs 70)
-
20% higher Boost Clock (2400 MHz vs 2000 MHz)
-
15% higher 3DMark Time Spy score (12427 vs 10823)
SPECIFICATION TABLE COMPARISON OF Intel Arc A580 AND Arc A750
Below is the detailed specification table comparing Intel Arc A580 and Arc A750.
Note: Highlighted specs mean that GPU wins that spec row.
If neither side is highlighted, it is a tie or there is not enough data for both specs.
| Specification | Intel Arc A580 | Arc A750 |
|---|---|---|
|
General Info
|
||
| GPU Name: | Intel Arc A580 | Arc A750 |
| GPU Type: | Discrete | Discrete |
| Codename: | DG2-512 | DG2-512 |
| Vendor: | Intel | Intel |
| Foundry: | TSMC | TSMC |
| Architecture: | Xe-HPG | Xe-HPG |
| Generation: | Alchemist (Arc 5) | Alchemist (Arc 7) |
| Release Date: | October 10, 2023 | October 12, 2022 |
|
Board Design
|
||
| Bus Interface: | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| PCIe Version: | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| PCIe Lanes: | 16 | 16 |
| Process Size: | 6 nm | 6 nm |
| Transistors: | 21.7 billion | 21.7 billion |
| Density: | 53.4 MTr/mm² | 53.4 MTr/mm² |
| Die Size: | 406 mm² | 406 mm² |
| Total Graphics Power (TGP): | 175 W | 225 W |
|
Graphics Processor
|
||
| Compute Units: | 24 | 28 |
| Shading Units: | 3072 | 3584 |
| Texture Mapping Units (TMUs): | 192 | 224 |
| Render Output Units (ROPs): | 96 | 112 |
| Tensor Cores: | 384 | 448 |
| Ray Tracing Cores: | 24 | 28 |
| Base Clock: | 1700 MHz | 2050 MHz |
| Boost Clock: | 2000 MHz | 2400 MHz |
| L2 Cache: | 8 MB | 16 MB |
|
Raw Performance
|
||
| Pixel Fill Rate: | 192.0 GPixel/s | 268.8 GPixel/s |
| Texture Fill Rate: | 384.0 GTexel/s | 537.6 GTexel/s |
| FP32 Performance: | 12.29 TFLOPs | 17.20 TFLOPs |
|
Memory
|
||
| Memory Type: | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Size: | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory Bus Width: | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| Memory Clock: | 2000 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Effective Memory Speed: | 16000 Mbps | 16000 Mbps |
| Bandwidth: | 512 GB/s | 512 GB/s |
|
APIs
|
||
| DirectX: | 12.2 | 12.2 |
| Vulkan: | 1.4 | 1.4 |
| OpenGL: | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL: | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| Ray Tracing: | 1 | 1 |
| DisplayPort: | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| HDMI: | 2.1 | 2.1 |
|
Gaming FPS
|
||
| 1080p Ultra (FPS): | 70 | 79 |
| 1440p Ultra (FPS): | 51 | 59 |
| 4K Ultra (FPS): | 28 | 32 |
|
Benchmarks
|
||
|
3D Mark
|
||
| Steel Nomad Lite | 9233 | 10857 |
| Time Spy | 10823 | 12427 |
| Solar Bay | 40830 | 45632 |
| Port Royal | 5632 | 6591 |
| Fire Strike | 25422 | 30560 |
| Wild Life Extreme | 21117 | 23654 |
| Night Raid | 104294 | 110821 |
|
GeekBench 6 OpenCL
|
||
| Compute Score | 89982 | 99280 |
| Background Blur | 135.5 img/sec | 145.2 img/sec |
| Face Detection | 76.3 img/sec | 82 img/sec |
| Horizon Detection | 2.81 Gpixels/sec | 3.35 Gpixels/sec |
| Edge Detection | 4.37 Gpixels/sec | 5.01 Gpixels/sec |
| Gaussian Blur | 6.43 Gpixels/sec | 7.59 Gpixels/sec |
| Feature Matching | 0.8 Gpixels/sec | 0.81 Gpixels/sec |
| Stereo Matching | 417.1 Gpixels/sec | 462.4 Gpixels/sec |
| Particle Physics | 17700.8 | 18623.1 |
|
Passmark Graphics
|
||
| G3D Mark | 12072 | 12620 |
| G2D Mark | 743 | 737 |
| DirectX 11 | 72 | 73 |
| DirectX 12 | 65 | 70 |
| GPU Compute | 4913 | 5307 |
|
GFXBench 5
|
||
| Aztec Ruins High (4K) | 124.10 | 137.90 |
| Aztec Ruins Normal | 658.30 | 732.40 |
| Car Chase | 418.60 | 471.70 |
| Manhattan 3.1.1 (1440p) | 416.20 | 465.40 |
| T-Rex | 2398.50 | 2668.40 |
| Tessellation | 3208.60 | 3725.60 |
| ALU 2 | 2637.80 | 3065.60 |
| Driver Overhead 2 | 169.90 | 170.60 |
| API | OpenGL | OpenGL |
| OS | Windows | Windows |
|
Blender (Rendering)
|
||
| Blender Score | 1796 | 1924 |
|
GeekBench 6 ML
|
||
| Single Precision | 9364 | 12178 |
| Half Precision | 9631 | 12796 |
| Quantized | 7378 | 9086 |
| Image Classification | 4014 | 5475 |
| Image Segmentation | 7656 | 13781 |
| Image Super Resolution | 10138 | 11612 |
| Face Detection | 12636 | 18556 |
| Pose Estimation | 50065 | 58801 |
| Text Classification | 672 | 824 |
| Machine Translation | 1569 | 2397 |
| Object Detection | 5323 | 6895 |
| Depth Estimation | 20334 | 22219 |
| Style Transfer | 132558 | 161148 |
| Framework | ONNX | ONNX |
| Backend | DirectML | DirectML |
|
FurMark
|
||
| 1080p Vulkan | 7719 | 9414 |
| 1440p Vulkan | 5171 | 5690 |
| 2160p Vulkan | 2411 | 2871 |
| 1080p OpenGL | 7606 | 8547 |
| 1440p OpenGL | 4927 | 5580 |
| 2160p OpenGL | 2386 | 2701 |
Tip: ▲ indicates a higher-is-better spec advantage, while ▼ indicates a lower-is-better advantage.
PERFORMANCE CHART COMPARISON OF Intel Arc A580 AND Arc A750
The charts below visualize how Intel Arc A580 and Arc A750 stack up in key performance metrics.
Radar Chart Comparison
Bullet Chart Comparison
Release Timeline of Intel Arc A580 and Arc A750
Arc A750 was released 11 months, 28 days earlier than Intel Arc A580.
Value For Money Calculator
Prices use available launch or current data. Enter your own prices to see which GPU gives better value.
Intel Arc A580
Arc A750
Calculating...
Domain Score Summary
Scores are generated by Comparigon's scoring algorithm and are intended as a high-level guide. They may not map 1-to-1 with the individual spec-by-spec comparisons shown in the table.
Our Verdict
In conclusion, the Arc A750 has a narrow overall lead compared to the Intel Arc A580. Its strongest advantages are in Gaming Performance, AI & Machine Learning and Workstation. The Intel Arc A580 is the better fit if your top priority is Energy Efficiency.
Try to Compare Again One of These GPUs With Another GPU
Pick which GPU to keep, then search for the other GPU to compare.
Disclaimer: Specs, pricing, and benchmarks are sourced from official manufacturer data and verified test results. While we strive for precision, product details and pricing may change. Comparigon may earn an affiliate commission on qualifying purchases.