Arc B370 vs Radeon HD 8870M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 8870M and Arc B370, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
B370 outperforms HD 8870M by a whopping 415% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 764 | 318 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 62.69 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | Xe3-LPG (2026) |
| GPU code name | Venus | Panther Lake |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 April 2013 (13 years ago) | 27 January 2026 (less than a year ago) |
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 | 640 | 1280 |
| Core clock speed | 725 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 775 MHz | 2400 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,500 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 25 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 31.00 | 96.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.992 TFLOPS | 6.144 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 20 |
| TMUs | 40 | 40 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 10 |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB | 640 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 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).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | IGP |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | GDDR5 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 1125 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 72 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | + |
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 | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.9 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.4 |
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.
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.
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:
| 900p | 42
−400%
| 210−220
+400%
|
| Full HD | 33
−385%
| 160−170
+385%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 9−10
−400%
|
45−50
+400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
−400%
|
80−85
+400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
−400%
|
40−45
+400%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 5−6
−380%
|
24−27
+380%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 9−10
−400%
|
45−50
+400%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
−400%
|
75−80
+400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
−400%
|
80−85
+400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
−400%
|
40−45
+400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−400%
|
55−60
+400%
|
| Fortnite | 21−24
−378%
|
110−120
+378%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
−400%
|
95−100
+400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
−400%
|
80−85
+400%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−400%
|
270−280
+400%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 9−10
−400%
|
45−50
+400%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
−400%
|
75−80
+400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
−400%
|
80−85
+400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 87
−360%
|
400−450
+360%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
−400%
|
40−45
+400%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
−400%
|
180−190
+400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−400%
|
55−60
+400%
|
| Fortnite | 21−24
−378%
|
110−120
+378%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
−400%
|
95−100
+400%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
−400%
|
60−65
+400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
−400%
|
35−40
+400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
−400%
|
80−85
+400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
−400%
|
60−65
+400%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−400%
|
270−280
+400%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
−400%
|
75−80
+400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
−400%
|
40−45
+400%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
−400%
|
180−190
+400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−400%
|
55−60
+400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
−400%
|
95−100
+400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
−400%
|
80−85
+400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
−400%
|
60−65
+400%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−400%
|
270−280
+400%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 21−24
−378%
|
110−120
+378%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
−400%
|
40−45
+400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−33
−400%
|
150−160
+400%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
−400%
|
10−11
+400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
−400%
|
10−11
+400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−400%
|
160−170
+400%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−413%
|
200−210
+413%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−400%
|
10−11
+400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−400%
|
35−40
+400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−400%
|
45−50
+400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−380%
|
24−27
+380%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 7−8
−400%
|
35−40
+400%
|
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
−367%
|
14−16
+367%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−400%
|
80−85
+400%
|
| Valorant | 16−18
−400%
|
85−90
+400%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−400%
|
65−70
+400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−367%
|
14−16
+367%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−380%
|
24−27
+380%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−350%
|
18−20
+350%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
−350%
|
18−20
+350%
|
This is how HD 8870M and Arc B370 compete in popular games:
- Arc B370 is 400% faster in 900p
- Arc B370 is 385% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.93 | 20.24 |
| Recency | 1 April 2013 | 27 January 2026 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 3 nm |
Arc B370 has a 415% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, and a 833% more advanced lithography process.
The Arc B370 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8870M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
