GeForce 710A vs Arc 8-Core iGPU
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Arc 8-Core iGPU and GeForce 710A, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
8-Core iGPU outperforms 710A by a whopping 1461% 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 | 370 | 1152 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 2.38 |
| Architecture | Xe LPG (2023−2025) | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Meteor Lake iGPU | GF117 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 14 December 2023 (2 years ago) | 1 April 2013 (13 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 | 96 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 775 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2300 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 585 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 33 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 12.40 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.2976 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 1.5 MB | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 128 KB |
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 2.0 x16 |
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 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 14.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
| 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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_2 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
| CUDA | - | 2.1 |
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 | 35
+1650%
| 2−3
−1650%
|
| 1440p | 17
+1600%
| 1−2
−1600%
|
| 4K | 14 | 0−1 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 111
+1486%
|
7−8
−1486%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+1600%
|
2−3
−1600%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 40
+1900%
|
2−3
−1900%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+1625%
|
4−5
−1625%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 85
+1600%
|
5−6
−1600%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+1600%
|
2−3
−1600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 39
+1850%
|
2−3
−1850%
|
| Fortnite | 85−90
+1680%
|
5−6
−1680%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+1575%
|
4−5
−1575%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+1600%
|
3−4
−1600%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+1900%
|
3−4
−1900%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+1525%
|
8−9
−1525%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+1625%
|
4−5
−1625%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 42
+2000%
|
2−3
−2000%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 210−220
+1650%
|
12−14
−1650%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+1600%
|
2−3
−1600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 36
+1700%
|
2−3
−1700%
|
| Fortnite | 85−90
+1680%
|
5−6
−1680%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+1575%
|
4−5
−1575%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+1600%
|
3−4
−1600%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 25
+2400%
|
1−2
−2400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 28
+2700%
|
1−2
−2700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+1900%
|
3−4
−1900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 49
+1533%
|
3−4
−1533%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+1525%
|
8−9
−1525%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+1625%
|
4−5
−1625%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+1600%
|
2−3
−1600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 34
+1600%
|
2−3
−1600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+1575%
|
4−5
−1575%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+1900%
|
3−4
−1900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24
+2300%
|
1−2
−2300%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+1525%
|
8−9
−1525%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 85−90
+1680%
|
5−6
−1680%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+1500%
|
2−3
−1500%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 110−120
+1600%
|
7−8
−1600%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 11 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 150−160
+1470%
|
10−11
−1470%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+1510%
|
10−11
−1510%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+2200%
|
2−3
−2200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 32
+1500%
|
2−3
−1500%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+1900%
|
2−3
−1900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+2300%
|
1−2
−2300%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 35−40
+1750%
|
2−3
−1750%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 9 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+1700%
|
5−6
−1700%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+2300%
|
1−2
−2300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+2700%
|
1−2
−2700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 16−18
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
This is how Arc 8-Core iGPU and GeForce 710A compete in popular games:
- Arc 8-Core iGPU is 1650% faster in 1080p
- Arc 8-Core iGPU is 1600% faster in 1440p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 15.92 | 1.02 |
| Recency | 14 December 2023 | 1 April 2013 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 28 nm |
Arc 8-Core iGPU has a 1461% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.
The Arc 8-Core iGPU is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 710A 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.
