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 Pro A60M Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£330VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):95 W

Intel ARC Pro A60M 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.

5.0/10

Overall score

Score
5.0/ 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 87% of models
Score components

90%

5.0

Technical score

10%

?

User score

â–¼Worse than 87% of graphics cards
6.1

Value for money

Value for money
6.1/ 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 89% of models
Score components

70%

5.0

Overall score

30%

8.8

Price

â–¼Worse than 89%
5.0

Technical score

Technical score
5.0/ 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 84% of models
Score components

44%

3.1

Performance

24%

3.7

Memory

12%

7.4

Power & Cooling

11%

9.3

Platform & Features

5%

8.7

Design

4%

9.1

Connectivity & Media

â–¼Worse than 84%
?

User score

User score
8.0/ 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–¼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image
Best prices
    N/A~ £330
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 Pro A60M

Technical score
Technical score
5.0/ 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 84% of models
Score components:

44%

3.1

Performance

24%

3.7

Memory

12%

7.4

Power & Cooling

11%

9.3

Platform & Features

5%

8.7

Design

4%

9.1

Connectivity & Media

5.0
User score
User score
8.0/ 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–¼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

?
Popularity
Popularity
1.0/ 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
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Popularity:
Intel ARC Pro A60M has a popularity score of 1 point, which is lower than that of 57.7% of products in this category.
1.0
Value for money
Value for money
6.1/ 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 89% of models
Score components:

70%

5.0

Overall score

30%

8.8

Price

6.1
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
?
3DMark Port Royal score
?
PassMark (G3D) result
10,500 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 10,500 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 83.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
?
Floating-point performance
9.42 TFLOPS
Market range: <4.38 TFLOPS – >57.42 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 9.42 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 75.8% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 57.5% of graphics cards and equal to 25.1% 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
128 bit
Market range: <64 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 69.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
256 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 256 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 80.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.7% 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
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 23.4% of graphics cards and equal to 76.6% 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
?
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)
95 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 95 W, which is lower than that of 89.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
95 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 95 W under peak load, which is lower than 90.6% of graphics cards and equal to 0.3% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
600 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 600 W PSU, which is lower than that of 54.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 7.9% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
95 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 95 W, which is lower than that of 90.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
95 W
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
37.5 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 37.5 mm tall, which is shorter than 99.5% of graphics cards.
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

Intel ARC Pro A60M vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryPlatform & FeaturesConnectivity & MediaPower & CoolingDesign
  • 55.8% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (95 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    95 W vs 215 W
  • 87.5 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (37.5 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    37.5 mm vs 125 mm
  • 112 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (256 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    256 vs 144
  • 57.8% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (95 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    95 W vs 225 W
  • 14.3% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2000 MHz vs 1750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1750 MHz.
    2,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 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
  • Supports virtual GPU
    This graphics card supports virtual GPU features, the average graphics card does not.
  • 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
  • 112 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (256 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    256 vs 144
  • 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
  • 14.3% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2000 MHz vs 1750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1750 MHz.
    2,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • Supports virtual GPU
    This graphics card supports virtual GPU features, the average graphics card does not.
  • 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
  • 55.8% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (95 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    95 W vs 215 W
  • 57.8% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (95 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    95 W vs 225 W
  • 7.7% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (600 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    600 W vs 650 W
  • 56.8% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (95 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    95 W vs 220 W
  • 87.5 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (37.5 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    37.5 mm vs 125 mm
  • 48.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1300 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,300 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 128 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    128 bit vs 256 bit
  • 24 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (16 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    16 vs 40
  • 53.1% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (900 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    900 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 24 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (16 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    16 vs 40
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • 4.22x less popular
    Intel ARC Pro A60M is less popular than the average graphics card (1 vs 4.2).
    1 vs 4.22
  • 17.5% worse value for money
    Intel ARC Pro A60M has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.12 vs 7.2).
    6.12 vs 7.2
  • 48.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1300 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,300 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 24 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (16 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    16 vs 40
  • 53.1% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (900 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    900 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 24 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (16 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    16 vs 40
  • 56.3% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (166.4 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    166.4 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 49% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (83.2 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
    83.2 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
  • 56 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (128 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    128 vs 184
  • 58.3% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (9.4 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
    9.42 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
  • 53.6% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (10500 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
    10,500 points vs 22,653 points
  • 2,304 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (2048 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    2,048 vs 4,352
  • 128 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    128 bit vs 256 bit
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 42.9% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (256 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    256 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 15.8% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (16000 MHz vs 19000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19000 MHz.
    16,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 66.7% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (8 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    8 MB vs 24 MB
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • 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 vs 8
  • 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
  • 49.8% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (11500 million vs 22900 million). The average graphics card has 22900 million transistors.
    11,500 million vs 22,900 million
  • Narrower decode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware decode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1).
    H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1
  • No HDMI output
    This graphics card does not include HDMI output, the average graphics card does.
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • No overclocking support
    This graphics card does not support overclocking, the average graphics card does.
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

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

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel ARC Pro A60M

  • Cost-effective professional alternative to NVIDIA and AMD workstation cards
  • Certified professional drivers optimized for CAD, 3D modeling, and engineering applications
  • Excellent media processing with full AV1 hardware encoding and decoding
  • Strong AI acceleration performance due to 256 dedicated XMX engines
  • Support for modern graphical standards like hardware-based ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate
  • Higher VRAM capacity (8GB) compared to some entry-level mobile competitors

What we don't like about Intel ARC Pro A60M

  • Not intended or optimized for high-end gaming performance compared to consumer-grade GPUs
  • Initial driver stability was inconsistent, though regular updates are improving the experience
  • Requires Resizeable BAR (ReBAR) support on the host system to achieve full performance
  • Inconsistent performance in older games or legacy applications
  • Higher power draw and thermal requirements compared to some integrated solutions
  • Limited availability in certain regions and from retail partners

Verdict

The Intel Arc Pro A60M is a professional mobile workstation graphics card based on the 6nm Alchemist Xe-HPG microarchitecture, featuring 16 Xe-cores, 256 XMX engines, and 16 dedicated ray tracing units. Key technical specifications include 8GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 256 GB/s bandwidth, a boost clock of 1300 MHz, and a power draw (TGP) ranging between 75W and 95W. Its main pros include hardware-accelerated AV1 encoding/decoding, ISV certification for professional CAD and design software, and support for up to four HDR displays. However, it faces cons such as lower absolute performance compared to high-end mobile workstations and potential driver optimization hurdles for older legacy software applications.

Compare Intel ARC Pro A60M 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 Pro A60M and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found