Arc B370 vs Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) and Arc B370, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
B370 outperforms R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) by a whopping 1965% 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 | 1171 | 311 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 63.25 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.1 (2014) | Xe3-LPG (2026) |
| GPU code name | Beema | Panther Lake |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 29 April 2014 (12 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 | 128 | 1280 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 850 MHz | 2400 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 25 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 96.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 6.144 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 20 |
| TMUs | no data | 40 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 10 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 640 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 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 | no data | 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 | no data | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | no data | System Shared |
| 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 data | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (FL 12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.9 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.4 |
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 | 6
−1900%
| 120−130
+1900%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−1900%
|
40−45
+1900%
|
| Palworld | 4−5
−1900%
|
80−85
+1900%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−1900%
|
40−45
+1900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−1700%
|
18−20
+1700%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−1700%
|
18−20
+1700%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1900%
|
120−130
+1900%
|
| Palworld | 4−5
−1900%
|
80−85
+1900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−1900%
|
180−190
+1900%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−1835%
|
600−650
+1835%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
−1900%
|
500−550
+1900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−1900%
|
40−45
+1900%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−1900%
|
280−290
+1900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−1700%
|
18−20
+1700%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−1700%
|
18−20
+1700%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1900%
|
120−130
+1900%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−1700%
|
18−20
+1700%
|
| Palworld | 4−5
−1900%
|
80−85
+1900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−1900%
|
180−190
+1900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−1900%
|
140−150
+1900%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−1835%
|
600−650
+1835%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−1900%
|
40−45
+1900%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−1900%
|
280−290
+1900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−1700%
|
18−20
+1700%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1900%
|
120−130
+1900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−1900%
|
180−190
+1900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−1900%
|
140−150
+1900%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−1835%
|
600−650
+1835%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−1700%
|
18−20
+1700%
|
| Palworld | 4−5
−1900%
|
80−85
+1900%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−1900%
|
60−65
+1900%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 6−7
−1900%
|
120−130
+1900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−1900%
|
220−230
+1900%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−1700%
|
18−20
+1700%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−1900%
|
40−45
+1900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−1900%
|
40−45
+1900%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−1700%
|
18−20
+1700%
|
| Palworld | 1−2
−1700%
|
18−20
+1700%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−1900%
|
300−310
+1900%
|
| Valorant | 7−8
−1900%
|
140−150
+1900%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−1900%
|
40−45
+1900%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1900%
|
40−45
+1900%
|
This is how R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) and Arc B370 compete in popular games:
- Arc B370 is 1900% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.99 | 20.44 |
| Recency | 29 April 2014 | 27 January 2026 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 3 nm |
Arc B370 has a 1965% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 833% more advanced lithography process.
The Arc B370 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 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.
