ATI Radeon HD 2900 GT vs Arc 8-Core iGPU
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Arc 8-Core iGPU with Radeon HD 2900 GT, including specs and performance data.
8-Core iGPU outperforms HD 2900 by a whopping 2174% 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 | 1230 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 0.36 |
| Architecture | Xe LPG (2023−2025) | TeraScale (2005−2013) |
| GPU code name | Meteor Lake iGPU | R600 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 14 December 2023 (2 years ago) | 6 November 2007 (18 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 8 | 240 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 601 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2300 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 720 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 80 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 150 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 7.212 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.2885 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 12 |
| TMUs | no data | 12 |
| L1 Cache | 1.5 MB | no data |
| 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 1.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 8-pin |
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 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 256 MB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 51.2 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| 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 | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_2 | 10.0 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | no data | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | no data | N/A |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
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
+3400%
| 1−2
−3400%
|
| 1440p | 17 | 0−1 |
| 4K | 14 | 0−1 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 111
+2675%
|
4−5
−2675%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+3300%
|
1−2
−3300%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 40
+3900%
|
1−2
−3900%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+2200%
|
3−4
−2200%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 85
+2733%
|
3−4
−2733%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+3300%
|
1−2
−3300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 39
+3800%
|
1−2
−3800%
|
| Fortnite | 85−90
+2867%
|
3−4
−2867%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+3250%
|
2−3
−3250%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+2450%
|
2−3
−2450%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+2900%
|
2−3
−2900%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+2500%
|
5−6
−2500%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+2200%
|
3−4
−2200%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 42
+4100%
|
1−2
−4100%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 210−220
+2233%
|
9−10
−2233%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+3300%
|
1−2
−3300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 36
+3500%
|
1−2
−3500%
|
| Fortnite | 85−90
+2867%
|
3−4
−2867%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+3250%
|
2−3
−3250%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+2450%
|
2−3
−2450%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 25
+2400%
|
1−2
−2400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 28
+2700%
|
1−2
−2700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+2900%
|
2−3
−2900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 49
+2350%
|
2−3
−2350%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+2500%
|
5−6
−2500%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+2200%
|
3−4
−2200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+3300%
|
1−2
−3300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 34
+3300%
|
1−2
−3300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+3250%
|
2−3
−3250%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+2900%
|
2−3
−2900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24
+2300%
|
1−2
−2300%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+2500%
|
5−6
−2500%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 85−90
+2867%
|
3−4
−2867%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+3100%
|
1−2
−3100%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 110−120
+2280%
|
5−6
−2280%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 11 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 20−22 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 150−160
+2517%
|
6−7
−2517%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+2200%
|
7−8
−2200%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+2200%
|
2−3
−2200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 32
+3100%
|
1−2
−3100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+3900%
|
1−2
−3900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+2300%
|
1−2
−2300%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 35−40
+3600%
|
1−2
−3600%
|
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
+2900%
|
3−4
−2900%
|
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 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+2700%
|
1−2
−2700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 16−18 | 0−1 |
This is how Arc 8-Core iGPU and ATI HD 2900 GT compete in popular games:
- Arc 8-Core iGPU is 3400% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 15.92 | 0.70 |
| Recency | 14 December 2023 | 6 November 2007 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 80 nm |
Arc 8-Core iGPU has a 2174% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, and a 1500% more advanced lithography process.
The Arc 8-Core iGPU is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 2900 GT in performance tests.
Be aware that Arc 8-Core iGPU is a notebook graphics card while Radeon HD 2900 GT is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
