Arc A370M vs Radeon Pro VII

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro VII with Arc A370M, including specs and performance data.

Pro VII
2020, $1,899
16 GB HBM2, 250 Watt
32.81
+167%

Pro VII outperforms A370M by a whopping 167% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking182451
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.10no data
Power efficiency10.1527.14
ArchitectureGCN 5.1 (2018−2022)Xe-HPG (2022−2024)
GPU code nameVega 20DG2-128
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date13 May 2020 (6 years ago)30 March 2022 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,899 no data

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 cores38401024
Core clock speed1400 MHz1550 MHz
Boost clock speed1700 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors13,230 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate408.0131.2
Floating-point processing power13.06 TFLOPSno data
ROPs6432
TMUs24064
Ray Tracing Coresno data8
L1 Cache960 KB1.5 MB
L2 Cache4 MB4 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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length305 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data

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 typeHBM2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount16 GB4 GB
Memory bus width4096 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth1024 GB/s112.0 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 Connectors6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4aPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.76.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan1.31.4

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.

Pro VII 32.81
+167%
Arc A370M 12.28

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 VII 13668
+167%
Samples: 75
Arc A370M 5115
Samples: 2

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 HD100−110
+156%
39
−156%
1440p50−55
+150%
20
−150%
4K90−95
+165%
34
−165%

Cost per frame, $

1080p18.99no data
1440p37.98no data
4K21.10no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 46
+0%
46
+0%
Palworld 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 46
+0%
46
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 37
+0%
37
+0%
Far Cry 5 49
+0%
49
+0%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Palworld 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 25
+0%
25
+0%
Dota 2 68
+0%
68
+0%
Far Cry 5 46
+0%
46
+0%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 28
+0%
28
+0%
Metro Exodus 34
+0%
34
+0%
Palworld 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 53
+0%
53
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21
+0%
21
+0%
Dota 2 66
+0%
66
+0%
Far Cry 5 43
+0%
43
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 26
+0%
26
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Palworld 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 11
+0%
11
+0%
Metro Exodus 20
+0%
20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 29
+0%
29
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Palworld 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Palworld 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 40
+0%
40
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Palworld 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

This is how Pro VII and Arc A370M compete in popular games:

  • Pro VII is 156% faster in 1080p
  • Pro VII is 150% faster in 1440p
  • Pro VII is 165% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 65 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 32.81 12.28
Recency 13 May 2020 30 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 7 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 35 Watt

Pro VII has a 167% higher aggregate performance score, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Arc A370M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 17% more advanced lithography process, and 614% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro VII is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A370M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro VII is a workstation graphics card while Arc A370M is a notebook 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.


2.5 2149 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 208 votes

Rate Arc A370M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro VII or Arc A370M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.