Arc A350M vs Apple M1 8-Core GPU

Place in the ranking	378	358
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	no data	40.38
Architecture	no data	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	no data	DG2-128
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	10 November 2020 (4 years ago)	30 March 2022 (2 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	8	768
Core clock speed	1278 MHz	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1150 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	5 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	25 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	55.20
Floating-point processing power	no data	1.766 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	24
TMUs	no data	48
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	6

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

PCIe 4.0 x8

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	no data	4 GB
Memory bus width	no data	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	112.0 GB/s
Shared memory	+	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

no data

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	no data	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	no data	6.6
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	3.0
Vulkan	-	1.3

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	27 −29.6%	35 +29.6%
1440p	14−16 −14.3%	16 +14.3%
4K	7−8 −14.3%	8 +14.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −8.3%	24−27 +8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +0%	27 +0%
Elden Ring	40−45 +86.4%	22 −86.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −6.7%	45−50 +6.7%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −8.3%	24−27 +8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +200%	9 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −20%	66 +20%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −8.1%	40−45 +8.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 −5.9%	35−40 +5.9%
Valorant	50−55 −3.7%	56 +3.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −6.7%	45−50 +6.7%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −8.3%	24−27 +8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +238%	8 −238%
Dota 2	45−50 +28.9%	38 −28.9%
Elden Ring	40−45 −2.4%	42 +2.4%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +92.6%	27 −92.6%
Fortnite	75−80 −6.5%	80−85 +6.5%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +3.8%	53 −3.8%
Grand Theft Auto V	45−50 +88.5%	26 −88.5%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −8.1%	40−45 +8.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−105 −6%	100−110 +6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 −5.9%	35−40 +5.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 −7.1%	45−50 +7.1%
Valorant	50−55 −7.4%	55−60 +7.4%
World of Tanks	180−190 −4.9%	190−200 +4.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −6.7%	45−50 +6.7%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −8.3%	24−27 +8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +350%	6 −350%
Dota 2	45−50 −20.4%	59 +20.4%
Far Cry 5	50−55 −3.8%	50−55 +3.8%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +22.2%	45 −22.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−105 −6%	100−110 +6%
Valorant	50−55 −7.4%	55−60 +7.4%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	18−20 +90%	10 −90%
Elden Ring	21−24 +23.5%	17 −23.5%
Grand Theft Auto V	20−22 +100%	10 −100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 −16.5%	120−130 +16.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −8.3%	12−14 +8.3%
World of Tanks	95−100 −6.2%	100−110 +6.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 −7.4%	27−30 +7.4%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −8.3%	12−14 +8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −10%	10−12 +10%
Far Cry 5	30−35 −9.4%	35−40 +9.4%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −12.1%	37 +12.1%
Metro Exodus	27−30 −10.3%	30−35 +10.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −11.8%	18−20 +11.8%
Valorant	30−35 −5.9%	35−40 +5.9%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Dota 2	24−27 +118%	11 −118%
Elden Ring	9−10 +200%	3 −200%
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27 +118%	11 −118%
Metro Exodus	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 −7.5%	40−45 +7.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +118%	11 −118%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Dota 2	24−27 −8.3%	24−27 +8.3%
Far Cry 5	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Fortnite	14−16 −13.3%	16−18 +13.3%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	19 +0%
Valorant	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%

This is how Apple M1 8-Core GPU and Arc A350M compete in popular games:

Arc A350M is 30% faster in 1080p
Arc A350M is 14% faster in 1440p
Arc A350M is 14% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Apple M1 8-Core GPU is 350% faster.
in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A350M is 20% faster.

All in all, in popular games: