Arc A310 vs Radeon Pro 555X
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro 555X with Arc A310, including specs and performance data.
A310 outperforms Pro 555X by an impressive 69% 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 | 581 | 436 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 8.03 | 33.83 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Xe-HPG (2022−2024) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 21 | DG2-128 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 16 July 2018 (8 years ago) | 12 October 2022 (3 years 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 | 768 | 768 |
| Core clock speed | 907 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1750 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | 7,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 30 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 43.54 | 56.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.393 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 48 | 32 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 96 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 6 |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 1.1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1024 KB | 4 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 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1275 MHz | 1937 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 81.6 GB/s | 124.0 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 | 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.4 |
| 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.
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:
| Full HD | 21−24
−76.2%
| 37
+76.2%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 18−20
−184%
|
54
+184%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
−285%
|
154
+285%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
−75%
|
27−30
+75%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 14−16
−200%
|
42
+200%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 18−20
−111%
|
40
+111%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
−70.6%
|
55−60
+70.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
−165%
|
106
+165%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
−75%
|
27−30
+75%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
−104%
|
51
+104%
|
| Fortnite | 45−50
−61.7%
|
75−80
+61.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
−60%
|
55−60
+60%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
−71.4%
|
45−50
+71.4%
|
| Valorant | 80−85
−40%
|
110−120
+40%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 18−20
−42.1%
|
27
+42.1%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
−70.6%
|
55−60
+70.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+21.2%
|
33
−21.2%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 120−130
−48.4%
|
180−190
+48.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
−75%
|
27−30
+75%
|
| Dota 2 | 60−65
−66.7%
|
100−105
+66.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
−88%
|
47
+88%
|
| Fortnite | 45−50
−61.7%
|
75−80
+61.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
−60%
|
55−60
+60%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 27−30
+0%
|
28
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
−80%
|
27−30
+80%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
−71.4%
|
45−50
+71.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 20−22
−180%
|
56
+180%
|
| Valorant | 80−85
−40%
|
110−120
+40%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
−70.6%
|
55−60
+70.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
−75%
|
27−30
+75%
|
| Dota 2 | 60−65
−66.7%
|
100−105
+66.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
−76%
|
44
+76%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
−60%
|
55−60
+60%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
−71.4%
|
45−50
+71.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 20−22
−45%
|
29
+45%
|
| Valorant | 80−85
−40%
|
110−120
+40%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 45−50
−61.7%
|
75−80
+61.7%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
−78.6%
|
24−27
+78.6%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 60−65
−65%
|
95−100
+65%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 9−10
−122%
|
20−22
+122%
|
| Metro Exodus | 8−9
−100%
|
16−18
+100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
−123%
|
95−100
+123%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
−58.2%
|
120−130
+58.2%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 16−18
−118%
|
35−40
+118%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
−83.3%
|
10−12
+83.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 16−18
−81.3%
|
27−30
+81.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
−68.4%
|
30−35
+68.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
−90%
|
18−20
+90%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 16−18
−81.3%
|
27−30
+81.3%
|
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 6−7
−83.3%
|
10−12
+83.3%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−350%
|
9−10
+350%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 18−20
−38.9%
|
24−27
+38.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−200%
|
9−10
+200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−157%
|
18−20
+157%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−85.3%
|
60−65
+85.3%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−138%
|
18−20
+138%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−350%
|
9−10
+350%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Dota 2 | 27−30
−55.2%
|
45−50
+55.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−100%
|
14−16
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−76.9%
|
21−24
+76.9%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−85.7%
|
12−14
+85.7%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 7−8
−85.7%
|
12−14
+85.7%
|
This is how Pro 555X and Arc A310 compete in popular games:
- Arc A310 is 76% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Pro 555X is 21% faster.
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A310 is 350% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Pro 555X performs better in 1 test (2%)
- Arc A310 performs better in 57 tests (97%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (2%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 7.77 | 13.10 |
| Recency | 16 July 2018 | 12 October 2022 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 30 Watt |
Arc A310 has a 69% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 133% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.
The Arc A310 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 555X in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon Pro 555X is a mobile workstation graphics card while Arc A310 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
