Arc A770 vs Quadro K620

Place in the ranking	682	198
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.11	47.29
Power efficiency	9.10	11.05
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	GM107	DG2-512
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	22 July 2014 (12 years ago)	12 October 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$189.89	$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

Arc A770 has 4160% better value for money than Quadro K620.

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	384	4096
Core clock speed	1058 MHz	2100 MHz
Boost clock speed	1124 MHz	2400 MHz
Number of transistors	1,870 million	21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	41 Watt	225 Watt
Texture fill rate	26.98	614.4
Floating-point processing power	0.8632 TFLOPS	19.66 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	128
TMUs	24	256
Tensor Cores	no data	512
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	32
L1 Cache	192 KB	no data
L2 Cache	2 MB	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 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	160 mm	no data
Width	1" (2.5 cm)	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	128 Bit	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	Up to 29 GB/s	512.0 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-
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	1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
Number of simultaneous displays	4	no data
HDMI	-	+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Desktop Management	+	no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX	12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.6
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.3
CUDA	5.0	-
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.

Quadro K620 5.28

Arc A770 32.07
+507%

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.

Quadro K620 2201
Samples: 2913

Arc A770 13362
+507%

Samples: 1825

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	16−18 −84.3%	102
1440p	9−10 −84.7%	59
4K	6−7 −83.8%	37

Cost per frame, $

1080p	11.87	3.23 +72.8%
1440p	21.10	5.58 +73.6%
4K	31.65	8.89 +71.9%

Arc A770 has 73% lower cost per frame in 1080p
Arc A770 has 74% lower cost per frame in 1440p
Arc A770 has 72% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart	179	179
Counter-Strike 2	317	317
Cyberpunk 2077	78	78
Resident Evil 4 Remake	166	166

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart	132	132
Battlefield 5	110−120	110−120
Counter-Strike 2	270	270
Cyberpunk 2077	70	70
Far Cry 5	117	117
Fortnite	140−150	140−150
Forza Horizon 4	33	33
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140	130−140
Valorant	200−210	200−210

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart	99	99
Battlefield 5	110−120	110−120
Counter-Strike 2	143	143
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	270−280	270−280
Cyberpunk 2077	61	61
Far Cry 5	109	109
Fortnite	140−150	140−150
Forza Horizon 4	31	31
Grand Theft Auto V	105	105
Metro Exodus	113	113
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140	130−140
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	196	196
Valorant	200−210	200−210

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5	110−120	110−120
Cyberpunk 2077	58	58
Far Cry 5	104	104
Forza Horizon 4	23	23
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140	130−140
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	72	72
Valorant	200−210	200−210

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite

140−150

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2	90	90
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	220−230	220−230
Grand Theft Auto V	45	45
Metro Exodus	71	71
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180	170−180
Valorant	230−240	230−240

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5	85−90	85−90
Cyberpunk 2077	45	45
Far Cry 5	82	82
Forza Horizon 4	15	15
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60	60

1440p
Epic

Fortnite

80−85

4K
High

Atomic Heart	24−27	24−27
Counter-Strike 2	28	28
Grand Theft Auto V	48	48
Metro Exodus	47	47
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	73	73
Valorant	190−200	190−200

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5	50−55	50−55
Counter-Strike 2	35−40	35−40
Cyberpunk 2077	26	26
Far Cry 5	49	49
Forza Horizon 4	8	8
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45	40−45

4K
Epic

Fortnite

40−45

This is how Quadro K620 and Arc A770 compete in popular games:

Arc A770 is 538% faster in 1080p
Arc A770 is 556% faster in 1440p
Arc A770 is 517% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

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

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.28	32.07
Recency	22 July 2014	12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	41 Watt	225 Watt

Quadro K620 has 82% lower power consumption.

Arc A770, on the other hand, has a 507% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 79% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A770 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K620 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K620 is a workstation graphics card while Arc A770 is a desktop one.