Arc Pro B370 vs Radeon Vega 7
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Vega 7 and Arc Pro B370, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Pro B370 outperforms Vega 7 by a whopping 227% 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 | 619 | 297 |
| Place by popularity | 23 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 11.56 | 68.06 |
| Architecture | GCN 5.1 (2018−2022) | Xe3-LPG (2026) |
| GPU code name | Cezanne | Panther Lake |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 13 April 2021 (5 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 | 448 | 1280 |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1900 MHz | 2400 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 9,800 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 25 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 53.20 | 96.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.702 TFLOPS | 6.144 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 20 |
| TMUs | 28 | 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 | IGP | IGP |
| 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 | System Shared | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 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 outputs | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.9 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 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 | 22 | 70−75
+218%
|
| 1440p | 28 | 90−95
+221%
|
| 4K | 18 | 55−60
+206%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 16−18 | 50−55
+213%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35 | 110−120
+224%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18 | 55−60
+206%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 12−14 | 35−40
+192%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 16−18 | 50−55
+213%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 28 | 90−95
+221%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35 | 110−120
+224%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14 | 45−50
+221%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 20 | 65−70
+225%
|
| Fortnite | 63 | 200−210
+217%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 37 | 120−130
+224%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27 | 80−85
+220%
|
| Valorant | 70−75 | 230−240
+215%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 16−18 | 50−55
+213%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 23 | 75−80
+226%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35 | 110−120
+224%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 58 | 180−190
+210%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10 | 30−33
+200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18 | 55−60
+206%
|
| Fortnite | 27 | 85−90
+215%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35 | 110−120
+214%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 17 | 55−60
+224%
|
| Metro Exodus | 13 | 40−45
+208%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 23 | 75−80
+226%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18 | 55−60
+206%
|
| Valorant | 73 | 230−240
+215%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21 | 65−70
+210%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9 | 27−30
+200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18 | 55−60
+206%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27 | 85−90
+215%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27 | 80−85
+220%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 13 | 40−45
+208%
|
| Valorant | 25 | 80−85
+220%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 14 | 45−50
+221%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14 | 35−40
+192%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 50−55 | 170−180
+227%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 7−8 | 21−24
+200%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6−7 | 18−20
+200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45 | 130−140
+225%
|
| Valorant | 48 | 150−160
+213%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14 | 35−40
+192%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6 | 16−18
+220%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14 | 40−45
+208%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18 | 50−55
+213%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10 | 27−30
+200%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 12−14 | 40−45
+208%
|
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 5−6 | 16−18
+220%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18 | 55−60
+224%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3 | 6−7
+200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6 | 16−18
+220%
|
| Valorant | 25 | 80−85
+220%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7 | 18−20
+200%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 6−7
+200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7 | 18−20
+200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11 | 30−33
+200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8 | 21−24
+200%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 6−7 | 18−20
+200%
|
This is how Vega 7 and Arc Pro B370 compete in popular games:
- Arc Pro B370 is 218% faster in 1080p
- Arc Pro B370 is 221% faster in 1440p
- Arc Pro B370 is 206% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 6.71 | 21.95 |
| Recency | 13 April 2021 | 27 January 2026 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 25 Watt |
Arc Pro B370 has a 227% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 57% more advanced lithography process, and 44% lower power consumption.
The Arc Pro B370 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Vega 7 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.
