Arc A770 vs Radeon Pro V620

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro V620 with Arc A770, including specs and performance data.

Pro V620
2021
32 GB GDDR6, 300 Watt
63.65
+98.7%

Pro V620 outperforms A770 by an impressive 99% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking37197
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data47.99
Power efficiency16.4111.02
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameNavi 21DG2-512
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date4 November 2021 (4 years ago)12 October 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

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 cores46084096
Core clock speed1825 MHz2100 MHz
Boost clock speed2200 MHz2400 MHz
Number of transistors26,800 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)300 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate633.6614.4
Floating-point processing power20.28 TFLOPS19.66 TFLOPS
ROPs128128
TMUs288256
Tensor Coresno data512
Ray Tracing Cores7232
L0 Cache1.1 MBno data
L1 Cache1 MBno data
L2 Cache4 MB16 MB
L3 Cache128 MBno data

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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pin1x 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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount32 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/s512.0 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 outputs1x 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.

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan1.21.3
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.

Pro V620 63.65
+98.7%
Arc A770 32.04

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.

Pro V620 26519
+98.7%
Samples: 3
Arc A770 13347
Samples: 1775

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 HD200−210
+96.1%
102
−96.1%
1440p110−120
+86.4%
59
−86.4%
4K70−75
+89.2%
37
−89.2%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.23
1440pno data5.58
4Kno data8.89

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 317
+0%
317
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 78
+0%
78
+0%
Palworld 127
+0%
127
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 166
+0%
166
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 270
+0%
270
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 70
+0%
70
+0%
Far Cry 5 117
+0%
117
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 33
+0%
33
+0%
Palworld 106
+0%
106
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 143
+0%
143
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 61
+0%
61
+0%
Far Cry 5 109
+0%
109
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 31
+0%
31
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 105
+0%
105
+0%
Metro Exodus 113
+0%
113
+0%
Palworld 82
+0%
82
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 196
+0%
196
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 58
+0%
58
+0%
Far Cry 5 104
+0%
104
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 23
+0%
23
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 72
+0%
72
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Palworld 79
+0%
79
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 90
+0%
90
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45
+0%
45
+0%
Metro Exodus 71
+0%
71
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45
+0%
45
+0%
Far Cry 5 82
+0%
82
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 15
+0%
15
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60
+0%
60
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Palworld 60
+0%
60
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 48
+0%
48
+0%
Metro Exodus 47
+0%
47
+0%
Palworld 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 73
+0%
73
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 26
+0%
26
+0%
Far Cry 5 49
+0%
49
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8
+0%
8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Palworld 34
+0%
34
+0%

This is how Pro V620 and Arc A770 compete in popular games:

  • Pro V620 is 96% faster in 1080p
  • Pro V620 is 86% faster in 1440p
  • Pro V620 is 89% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 63.65 32.04
Recency 4 November 2021 12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount 32 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 7 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 300 Watt 225 Watt

Pro V620 has a 99% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Arc A770, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 months, a 17% more advanced lithography process, and 33% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro V620 is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A770 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro V620 is a workstation graphics card while Arc A770 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.

Community ratings

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


5 3 votes

Rate Radeon Pro V620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 5529 votes

Rate Arc A770 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro V620 or Arc A770, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.