Quadro P400 vs Arc 8-Core iGPU

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc 8-Core iGPU with Quadro P400, including specs and performance data.

Arc 8-Core iGPU
2023
18.48
+332%

Arc 8-Core iGPU outperforms P400 by a whopping 332% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking308688
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data2.52
Power efficiencyno data9.80
ArchitectureXe LPG (2023)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameMeteor Lake iGPUGP107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date14 December 2023 (1 year ago)7 February 2017 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$119.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores8256
Core clock speedno data1228 MHz
Boost clock speed2300 MHz1252 MHz
Number of transistorsno data3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data30 Watt
Texture fill rateno data20.03
Floating-point processing powerno data0.641 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data16

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1002 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data32.06 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 Connectorsno data3x mini-DisplayPort

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12_212 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
CUDA-6.1

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 HD35
+338%
8−9
−338%
1440p18
+350%
4−5
−350%
4K16
+433%
3−4
−433%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data15.00
1440pno data30.00
4Kno data40.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 53
+342%
12−14
−342%
Counter-Strike 2 26
+333%
6−7
−333%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+363%
8−9
−363%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 40
+344%
9−10
−344%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+356%
16−18
−356%
Counter-Strike 2 23
+360%
5−6
−360%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+363%
8−9
−363%
Far Cry 5 39
+333%
9−10
−333%
Fortnite 90−95
+348%
21−24
−348%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+344%
16−18
−344%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+380%
10−11
−380%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+364%
14−16
−364%
Valorant 130−140
+347%
30−33
−347%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 28
+367%
6−7
−367%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+356%
16−18
−356%
Counter-Strike 2 23
+360%
5−6
−360%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+336%
50−55
−336%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+363%
8−9
−363%
Far Cry 5 36
+350%
8−9
−350%
Fortnite 90−95
+348%
21−24
−348%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+344%
16−18
−344%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+380%
10−11
−380%
Grand Theft Auto V 25
+400%
5−6
−400%
Metro Exodus 28
+367%
6−7
−367%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+364%
14−16
−364%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 48
+380%
10−11
−380%
Valorant 130−140
+347%
30−33
−347%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+356%
16−18
−356%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+357%
7−8
−357%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+363%
8−9
−363%
Far Cry 5 34
+386%
7−8
−386%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+344%
16−18
−344%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+380%
10−11
−380%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+364%
14−16
−364%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24
+380%
5−6
−380%
Valorant 130−140
+347%
30−33
−347%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 90−95
+348%
21−24
−348%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+370%
27−30
−370%
Grand Theft Auto V 11
+450%
2−3
−450%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+340%
5−6
−340%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+374%
35−40
−374%
Valorant 160−170
+383%
35−40
−383%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+390%
10−11
−390%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Far Cry 5 32
+357%
7−8
−357%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+378%
9−10
−378%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+343%
7−8
−343%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+333%
9−10
−333%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
+350%
2−3
−350%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+400%
5−6
−400%
Valorant 95−100
+362%
21−24
−362%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+333%
6−7
−333%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+375%
4−5
−375%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+400%
6−7
−400%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%

This is how Arc 8-Core iGPU and Quadro P400 compete in popular games:

  • Arc 8-Core iGPU is 338% faster in 1080p
  • Arc 8-Core iGPU is 350% faster in 1440p
  • Arc 8-Core iGPU is 433% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.48 4.28
Recency 14 December 2023 7 February 2017
Chip lithography 5 nm 14 nm

Arc 8-Core iGPU has a 331.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc 8-Core iGPU is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P400 in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc 8-Core iGPU is a notebook card while Quadro P400 is a workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


Intel Arc 8-Core iGPU
Arc 8-Core iGPU
NVIDIA Quadro P400
Quadro P400

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.


4.2 57 votes

Rate Arc 8-Core iGPU on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 495 votes

Rate Quadro P400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Arc 8-Core iGPU or Quadro P400, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.