Arc A750 vs CMP 30HX

Place in the ranking	410	214
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	4.61	49.61
Power efficiency	8.99	10.46
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	TU116	DG2-512
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	25 February 2021 (5 years ago)	12 October 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$799	$289

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

Arc A750 has 976% better value for money than CMP 30HX.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

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 cores	1408	3584
Core clock speed	1530 MHz	2050 MHz
Boost clock speed	1785 MHz	2400 MHz
Number of transistors	6,600 million	21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	125 Watt	225 Watt
Texture fill rate	157.1	537.6
Floating-point processing power	5.027 TFLOPS	17.2 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	112
TMUs	88	224
Tensor Cores	no data	448
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	28
L1 Cache	1.4 MB	no data
L2 Cache	1536 KB	16 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).

Interface	PCIe 1.0 x4	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	229 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	336.0 GB/s	512.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI	-	+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.8	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	3.0
Vulkan	1.3	1.3
CUDA	7.5	-
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.

CMP 30HX 14.50

Arc A750 30.37
+109%

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.

CMP 30HX 6042
Samples: 38

Arc A750 12651
+109%

Samples: 1878

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 HD	50−55 −53.3%	107
1440p	27−30	60 +122%
4K	16−18	36 +125%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	15.98	2.70 +83.1%
1440p	29.59	4.82 +83.7%
4K	49.94	8.03 +83.9%

Arc A750 has 83% lower cost per frame in 1080p
Arc A750 has 84% lower cost per frame in 1440p
Arc A750 has 84% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart	164	164
Counter-Strike 2	336	336
Cyberpunk 2077	75	75
Resident Evil 4 Remake	151	151

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart	123	123
Battlefield 5	110−120	110−120
Counter-Strike 2	270	270
Cyberpunk 2077	66	66
Far Cry 5	111	111
Fortnite	140−150	140−150
Forza Horizon 4	112	112
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130	120−130
Valorant	190−200	190−200

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart	89	89
Battlefield 5	110−120	110−120
Counter-Strike 2	144	144
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	270−280	270−280
Cyberpunk 2077	58	58
Far Cry 5	102	102
Fortnite	140−150	140−150
Forza Horizon 4	106	106
Grand Theft Auto V	99	99
Metro Exodus	105	105
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130	120−130
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	185	185
Valorant	190−200	190−200

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5	110−120	110−120
Cyberpunk 2077	55	55
Far Cry 5	98	98
Forza Horizon 4	90	90
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130	120−130
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	69	69
Valorant	190−200	190−200

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite

140−150

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2	89	89
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	210−220	210−220
Grand Theft Auto V	41	41
Metro Exodus	65	65
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180	170−180
Valorant	220−230	220−230

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5	80−85	80−85
Cyberpunk 2077	42	42
Far Cry 5	76	76
Forza Horizon 4	79	79
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	57	57

1440p
Epic

Fortnite

75−80

4K
High

Atomic Heart	24−27	24−27
Counter-Strike 2	20	20
Grand Theft Auto V	45	45
Metro Exodus	43	43
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	69	69
Valorant	180−190	180−190

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5	45−50	45−50
Counter-Strike 2	30−35	30−35
Cyberpunk 2077	23	23
Far Cry 5	45	45
Forza Horizon 4	61	61
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40	35−40

4K
Epic

Fortnite

35−40

This is how CMP 30HX and Arc A750 compete in popular games:

Arc A750 is 114% faster in 1080p
Arc A750 is 122% faster in 1440p
Arc A750 is 125% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 59 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	14.50	30.37
Recency	25 February 2021	12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	125 Watt	225 Watt

CMP 30HX has 44% lower power consumption.

Arc A750, on the other hand, has a 109% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 33% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 50% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A750 is our recommended choice as it beats the CMP 30HX in performance tests.

Be aware that CMP 30HX is a workstation graphics card while Arc A750 is a desktop one.