RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Embedded vs Arc Graphics 130V

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc Graphics 130V with RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Embedded, including specs and performance data.

Arc Graphics 130V
2024
16 GB LPDDR5x
10.82
RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Embedded
6 GB GDDR7, 35 Watt
24.90
+130%

RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Embedded outperforms Graphics 130V by a whopping 130% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking481257
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data55.06
ArchitectureXe² (2024)Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026)
GPU code nameLunar Lake iGPUGB207
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date24 September 2024 (1 year ago)no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores71792
Core clock speedno data2160 MHz
Boost clock speed1850 MHz2565 MHz
Number of transistorsno data16,900 million
Manufacturing process technology3 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data35 Watt
Texture fill rateno data143.6
Floating-point processing powerno data9.193 TFLOPS
ROPsno data24
TMUsno data56
Tensor Coresno data56
Ray Tracing Coresno data14
L1 Cacheno data1.8 MB
L2 Cacheno data24 MB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 5.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeLPDDR5xGDDR7
Maximum RAM amount16 GB6 GB
Memory bus widthno data96 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data288.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectorsno dataPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12_212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.4
CUDA-12.0
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

Arc Graphics 130V 10.82
RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Embedded 24.90
+130%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Arc Graphics 130V 4509
Samples: 1374
RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Embedded 10373
+130%
Samples: 3

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD34
−121%
75−80
+121%
1440p23
−117%
50−55
+117%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 27−30
−122%
60−65
+122%
Counter-Strike 2 51
−116%
110−120
+116%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−117%
50−55
+117%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 27−30
−122%
60−65
+122%
Battlefield 5 45−50
−129%
110−120
+129%
Counter-Strike 2 47
−113%
100−105
+113%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−117%
50−55
+117%
Far Cry 5 43
−121%
95−100
+121%
Fortnite 65−70
−115%
140−150
+115%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−113%
100−105
+113%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
−121%
75−80
+121%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
−118%
85−90
+118%
Valorant 95−100
−124%
220−230
+124%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 27−30
−122%
60−65
+122%
Battlefield 5 45−50
−129%
110−120
+129%
Counter-Strike 2 25
−120%
55−60
+120%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
−119%
350−400
+119%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−117%
50−55
+117%
Far Cry 5 39
−118%
85−90
+118%
Fortnite 65−70
−115%
140−150
+115%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−113%
100−105
+113%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
−121%
75−80
+121%
Grand Theft Auto V 40
−125%
90−95
+125%
Metro Exodus 21−24
−127%
50−55
+127%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
−118%
85−90
+118%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 53
−126%
120−130
+126%
Valorant 95−100
−124%
220−230
+124%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 45−50
−129%
110−120
+129%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−117%
50−55
+117%
Far Cry 5 36
−122%
80−85
+122%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−113%
100−105
+113%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
−118%
85−90
+118%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
−117%
50−55
+117%
Valorant 95−100
−124%
220−230
+124%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 65−70
−115%
140−150
+115%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 20−22
−125%
45−50
+125%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 80−85
−129%
190−200
+129%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−100%
30−33
+100%
Metro Exodus 12−14
−125%
27−30
+125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
−122%
120−130
+122%
Valorant 100−110
−126%
240−250
+126%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 27−30
−114%
60−65
+114%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−100%
18−20
+100%
Far Cry 5 21−24
−117%
50−55
+117%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−112%
55−60
+112%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−100%
30−33
+100%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 21−24
−117%
50−55
+117%

4K
High

Atomic Heart 9−10
−100%
18−20
+100%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
−127%
50−55
+127%
Metro Exodus 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−108%
27−30
+108%
Valorant 50−55
−120%
110−120
+120%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−118%
24−27
+118%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−111%
40−45
+111%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−110%
21−24
+110%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 10−11
−110%
21−24
+110%

This is how Arc Graphics 130V and RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Embedded compete in popular games:

  • RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Embedded is 121% faster in 1080p
  • RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Embedded is 117% faster in 1440p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.82 24.90
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 3 nm 5 nm

Arc Graphics 130V has a 167% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 67% more advanced lithography process.

RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Embedded, on the other hand, has a 130% higher aggregate performance score.

The RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Embedded is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc Graphics 130V in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc Graphics 130V is a notebook graphics card while RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Embedded is a mobile workstation one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 75 votes

Rate Arc Graphics 130V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.4 5 votes

Rate RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Embedded on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Arc Graphics 130V or RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Embedded, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.