OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v1.0: technical specifications plus authentic consumer ratings, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v1.0

Intel ARC A380 Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£140VRAM:6 GBMemory bus width:96 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):75 W

Intel ARC A380 Review: Compare 118 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel ARC A380
5.5/10

Overall score

Score
5.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the graphics card's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best graphics cards on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
Score components

90%

5.1

Technical score

10%

9.0

User score

â–¼Worse than 81% of graphics cards
6.8

Value for money

Value for money
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
Score components

70%

5.5

Overall score

30%

9.8

Price

â–¼Worse than 68%
5.1

Technical score

Technical score
5.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components

44%

3.4

Performance

24%

3.2

Memory

12%

8.0

Power & Cooling

11%

9.1

Platform & Features

5%

9.9

Design

4%

9.5

Connectivity & Media

â–¼Worse than 82%
9.0

User score

User score
9.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 84% of models
Score components

70%

8.6

User ratings

30%

10

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
â–²Better than 84%
  • intel-arc-a380
  • intel-arc-a380
  • intel-arc-a380
  • intel-arc-a380
  • intel-arc-a380
intel-arc-a380
intel-arc-a380
intel-arc-a380
intel-arc-a380
intel-arc-a380
Best prices
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card Intel ARC A380

Technical score
Technical score
5.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components:

44%

3.4

Performance

24%

3.2

Memory

12%

8.0

Power & Cooling

11%

9.1

Platform & Features

5%

9.9

Design

4%

9.5

Connectivity & Media

5.1
User score
User score
9.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 84% of models
Score components

70%

8.6

User ratings

30%

10

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
9.0
Popularity
Popularity
10/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you prefer a graphics card that has already been chosen and reviewed by many other users.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 92% of models
Popularity:
Intel ARC A380 has a popularity score of 10 points, which is higher than that of 91.9% of products in this category.
10
Value for money
Value for money
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
Score components:

70%

5.5

Overall score

30%

9.8

Price

6.8
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
5,000 points
Market range: <4k points – >34k points
This graphics card scores 5,000 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 84.6% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
1,820 points
Market range: <0 points – >25k points
This graphics card scores 1,820 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 80% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
6,302 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 6,302 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 91.8% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
2,775 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 2,775 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 92.4% of graphics cards.
Floating-point performance
4.2 TFLOPS
Market range: <4.38 TFLOPS – >57.42 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 4.2 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 90.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
6 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 6 GB of VRAM, which is less than 82.6% of graphics cards and equal to 5.2% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
GDDR version
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 15.9% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
96 bit
Market range: <64 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 96 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 95.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.4% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
186 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 186 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 89.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.3% of graphics cards and equal to 52.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x8
This graphics card uses x8 PCIe lanes, which is fewer than 76.7% of graphics cards and equal to 22.2% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.6% of graphics cards and equal to 77.4% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.7% of graphics cards and equal to 79.3% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 1.9% of graphics cards and equal to 98.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 8.3% of graphics cards and equal to 88.9% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 91% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21% of graphics cards and equal to 76.8% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 2, which is more advanced than on 66.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.7% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
10 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 10 Gbps, which is slower than on 63.1% of graphics cards and equal to 1.6% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
75 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 75 W, which is lower than that of 90.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.7% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
75 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 75 W under peak load, which is lower than 91.9% of graphics cards and equal to 2.3% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
450 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 450 W PSU, which is lower than that of 84.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
75 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 75 W, which is lower than that of 91.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.2% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
75 W
Show more
Size
222x 114x 42 mm
This graphics card measures 222x114x 42 mm, which is more compact than 90.1% of graphics cards and equal in size to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Length
222 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >350 mm
This graphics card is 222 mm long, which is shorter than 85.1% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Height
114 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 114 mm tall, which is shorter than 74.5% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.8% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 53.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 42.5% of graphics cards.
Weight
400 g
Market range: <500 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 400 g, which is lighter than 95% of graphics cards and equal in weight to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Show more

Intel ARC A380 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryPlatform & FeaturesConnectivity & MediaPower & CoolingDesign
  • 65.1% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (75 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    75 W vs 215 W
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 30.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (450 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    450 W vs 650 W
  • 63 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (222 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    222 mm vs 285 mm
  • 66.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (75 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    75 W vs 225 W
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • More compact card size
    This graphics card is more compact than the average graphics card (222x114 x 42 mm vs 285x127 x 52 mm). The average graphics card has a size of 285x127 x 52 mm.
    222x114 x 42 mm vs 285x127 x 52 mm
  • 10.7% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1937 MHz vs 1750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1750 MHz.
    1,937 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 12.4% higher user score
    User score
    9.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
    When it matters
    When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    Intel ARC A380
    the average graphics card
    Intel ARC A380 has a higher user score than the average graphics card (8.99 vs 8.000).
    8.99 vs 8
  • 3.79x cheaper
    Intel ARC A380 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£140 vs £530).
    £140 vs £530
  • 2.37x more popular
    Intel ARC A380 is more popular than the average graphics card (10 vs 4.2).
    10 vs 4.22
  • Better FP64 ratio
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:4 vs 1:64).
    1:4 vs 1:64
  • 4.2% higher base clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher base GPU clock than the average graphics card (2000 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    2,000 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 2.19x higher FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP64 performance than the average graphics card (1.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    1.05 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 10.7% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1937 MHz vs 1750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1750 MHz.
    1,937 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 46.8% smaller GPU die
    This graphics card has a lower GPU die size than the average graphics card (157 mm² vs 295 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 295 mm².
    157 mm² vs 295 mm²
  • Newer DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports a newer DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (2 vs 1.4a).
    2.0 vs 1.4a
  • 65.1% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (75 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    75 W vs 215 W
  • 30.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (450 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    450 W vs 650 W
  • 66.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (75 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    75 W vs 225 W
  • 65.9% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (75 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    75 W vs 220 W
  • 63 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (222 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    222 mm vs 285 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • More compact card size
    This graphics card is more compact than the average graphics card (222x114 x 42 mm vs 285x127 x 52 mm). The average graphics card has a size of 285x127 x 52 mm.
    222x114 x 42 mm vs 285x127 x 52 mm
  • 11 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (114 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    114 mm vs 125 mm
  • 60.8% lighter card weight
    This graphics card is lighter than the average graphics card (400 g vs 1021 g). The average graphics card weighs 1021 g.
    400 g vs 1,021 g
  • 160 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (96 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    96 bit vs 256 bit
  • 6 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (6 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    6 GB vs 12 GB
  • 32 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    8 vs 40
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 32 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    8 vs 40
  • 120 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (64 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    64 vs 184
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • 6.3% worse value for money
    Intel ARC A380 has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.77 vs 7.2).
    6.77 vs 7.2
  • 32 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    8 vs 40
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 32 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    8 vs 40
  • 120 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (64 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    64 vs 184
  • 65.6% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (131.2 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    131.2 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 18.2% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2050 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    2,050 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 59.8% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (65.6 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
    65.6 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
  • 32 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    32 vs 64
  • 81.4% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (4.2 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
    4.2 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
  • 72.2% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (6302 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
    6,302 points vs 22,653 points
  • 65.9% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (5000 points vs 14678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14678.5 points.
    5,000 points vs 14,678.5 points
  • 80.1% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (1820 points vs 9166 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9166 points.
    1,820 points vs 9,166 points
  • 77% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (2775 points vs 12074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12074 points.
    2,775 points vs 12,074 points
  • 16 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (128 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    128 vs 144
  • 71.7% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (8.4 TFLOPS vs 29.7 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.725 TFLOPS.
    8.4 TFLOPS vs 29.725 TFLOPS
  • 81.7% lower compute throughput
    This graphics card has a lower compute throughput than the average graphics card (4.2 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has compute throughput of 22.98 TFLOPS.
    4.2 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS
  • 3,328 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,024 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,024 vs 4,352
  • 160 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (96 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    96 bit vs 256 bit
  • 6 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (6 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    6 GB vs 12 GB
  • 58.5% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (186 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    186 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 18.4% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (15500 MHz vs 19000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19000 MHz.
    15,500 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 83.3% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (4 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    4 MB vs 24 MB
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x8 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x8 vs x16
  • 20% larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (6 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    6 nm vs 5 nm
  • Older encoder generation
    This graphics card uses an older encoder generation than the average graphics card (1 vs 8). The average graphics card uses encoder generation 8.
    1.0 vs 8
  • 1 older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2022 vs 2023).
    June 2022
    2,022 vs 2,023
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.6 vs 6.8).
    6.6 vs 6.8
  • 68.6% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (7200 million vs 22900 million). The average graphics card has 22900 million transistors.
    7,200 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.0b vs 2.1).
    2.0b vs 2.1
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • Narrower decode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware decode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1).
    H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1
  • No 3D output
    This graphics card does not support 3D output, the average graphics card does.
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 11 °C higher idle temperature
    This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (48 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    48 °C vs 37 °C
  • 5 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (100 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    100 °C vs 95 °C
  • 50% higher idle power draw
    This graphics card has a higher idle power draw than the average graphics card (18 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    18 W vs 12 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

T
techpowerup.com
26/07/2022
Summary of the review
Intel Arc A380 Review - Runs Fine on AMD Ryzen
T
techpowerup.com
22/02/2024
Summary of the review
Sparkle Arc A380 Genie Review www.michaelstinkerings.org
M
michaelstinkerings.org
18/11/2022
Summary of the review
Intel Arc A380 Review - Impressive, But Not In the Way You Think
T
techgage.com
28/09/2022
Summary of the review
An Alluring Alchemist: Intel Arc A380 GPU Creator Performance Review
T
tomshardware.com
02/09/2022
Summary of the review
Intel Arc A380 Review: Great for Video, Weak for Gaming
P
phoronix.com
29/08/2022
Summary of the review
Intel Arc Graphics A380: Compelling For Open-Source Enthusiasts & AV1 Video Encoding On Linux
T
techspot.com
01/08/2022
Summary of the review
Intel Arc A380 Review | TechSpot
C
computerbase.de
20/07/2022
Summary of the review
Intel Arc A380 im Test: Benchmarks in Full HD mit und ohne rBAR
(Translated)Show original
C
comptoir-hardware.com
29/08/2022
Summary of the review
L'A380 décolle sous Linux, mais pour quelles performances Overclocking.com
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
Reviews last updated: June 2026 · How we calculate this

What we like about Intel ARC A380

  • Excellent AV1 hardware encoding and decoding support for streaming and video production.
  • Competitive entry-level price, often found as the cheapest new discrete GPU available.
  • Low power consumption (75W TDP), with many models drawing power solely from the PCIe slot.
  • Substantial 6GB GDDR6 VRAM, providing a slight edge over 4GB competitors like the RX 6400 in modern textures.
  • Continuous driver improvements that have significantly boosted performance since launch.
  • Support for modern features like Ray Tracing and XeSS upscaling.

What we don't like about Intel ARC A380

  • Strict requirement for Resizable BAR (ReBAR) support; performance is significantly handicapped on older systems without it.
  • Weak gaming performance in older DirectX 9 and 11 titles compared to equivalent NVIDIA or AMD cards.
  • Inferior gaming performance per dollar compared to the used market (e.g., used GTX 1070 or RTX 2060).
  • High idle power consumption reported on certain multi-monitor configurations.
  • Inconsistent driver stability in specific niche games or professional applications.
  • Limited bandwidth due to the 96-bit memory bus and x8 PCIe interface.

Verdict

The Intel Arc A380 is an entry-level graphics card based on the 6nm Alchemist architecture, featuring 8 Xe-cores, 1024 shading units, and 8 dedicated ray tracing units. It is equipped with 6GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, delivering 186 GB/s of bandwidth and a base clock speed of 2000 MHz. Key pros include full AV1 hardware encoding support, DisplayPort 2.0 connectivity, and a low 75W TDP that often eliminates the need for external power connectors in compact builds. However, its main cons include a heavy reliance on Resizable BAR for acceptable performance, inconsistent gaming drivers for older titles, and relatively weak performance in modern AAA games compared to established competitors.

Compare Intel ARC A380 with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel ARC A380 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found