GeForce GT 220 vs Arc 8-Cores iGPU
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Arc 8-Cores iGPU with GeForce GT 220, including specs and performance data.
Arc 8-Cores iGPU outperforms GT 220 by a whopping 3138% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 284 | 1173 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | Xe LPG | GT2xx (2009−2012) |
| GPU code name | Meteor Lake iGPU | GT216 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 14 December 2023 (less than a year ago) | 12 October 2009 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $79.99 |
| Current price | no data | $121 (1.5x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 8 | 48 |
| CUDA cores | no data | 48 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 625 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2300 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 486 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 58 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 9.840 |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 144 gflops |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on Arc 8-Cores iGPU and GeForce GT 220 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 6.6" (16.8 cm) |
| Height | no data | 4.376" (11.1 cm) |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
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 | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 790 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 25.3 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
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 | VGADVIHDMI |
| Multi monitor support | no data | + |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | S/PDIF + HDA |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_2 | 11.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 3.1 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | no data | N/A |
| CUDA | no data | + |
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 | 40
+90.5%
| 21
−90.5%
|
| 1440p | 16 | -0−1 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | no data |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1000−1050
+3126%
|
30−35
−3126%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 1900−1950
+3120%
|
55−60
−3120%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 0−1 | no data |
| Far Cry 5 | 1150−1200
+3008%
|
37
−3008%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 0−1 | no data |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2700−2750
+3114%
|
80−85
−3114%
|
| Hitman 3 | 0−1 | no data |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 0−1 | no data |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1600−1650
+3100%
|
50−55
−3100%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 0−1 | no data |
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 0−1 | no data |
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | no data |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1000−1050
+3126%
|
30−35
−3126%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 1900−1950
+3120%
|
55−60
−3120%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 0−1 | no data |
| Far Cry 5 | 1100−1150
+3043%
|
35
−3043%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 0−1 | no data |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2700−2750
+3114%
|
80−85
−3114%
|
| Hitman 3 | 0−1 | no data |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 0−1 | no data |
| Metro Exodus | 1950−2000
+3097%
|
60−65
−3097%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1600−1650
+3100%
|
50−55
−3100%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 0−1 | no data |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | no data |
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 0−1 | no data |
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | no data |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1000−1050
+3126%
|
30−35
−3126%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 1900−1950
+3120%
|
55−60
−3120%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1050−1100
+3082%
|
33
−3082%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 1550−1600
+3063%
|
45−50
−3063%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2700−2750
+3114%
|
80−85
−3114%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | no data |
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 0−1 | no data |
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 700−750
+2943%
|
21−24
−2943%
|
| Hitman 3 | 650−700
+2995%
|
21−24
−2995%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 1150−1200
+3008%
|
35−40
−3008%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1050−1100
+3082%
|
30−35
−3082%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 950−1000
+3067%
|
30−33
−3067%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 1150−1200
+3094%
|
35−40
−3094%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 550−600
+2956%
|
18−20
−2956%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 500−550
+3025%
|
16−18
−3025%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 1100−1150
+3043%
|
35−40
−3043%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | no data |
| Far Cry New Dawn | 1100−1150
+3043%
|
35−40
−3043%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1100−1150
+3043%
|
35−40
−3043%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 600−650
+2900%
|
20−22
−2900%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 350−400
+2817%
|
12−14
−2817%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 290−300
+3122%
|
9−10
−3122%
|
| Hitman 3 | 450−500
+3114%
|
14−16
−3114%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 0−1 | no data |
| Metro Exodus | 550−600
+3135%
|
16−18
−3135%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 500−550
+3025%
|
16−18
−3025%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 350−400
+2817%
|
12−14
−2817%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 550−600
+2956%
|
18−20
−2956%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | no data |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 290−300
+3122%
|
9−10
−3122%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 550−600
+2956%
|
18−20
−2956%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 300−310
+2900%
|
10−11
−2900%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 450−500
+3114%
|
14−16
−3114%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 800−850
+3100%
|
24−27
−3100%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 220−230
+3043%
|
7−8
−3043%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
Full HD
High Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 7−8 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Hitman 3 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 3−4 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra Preset
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 4−5 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
This is how Arc 8-Cores iGPU and GT 220 compete in popular games:
- Arc 8-Cores iGPU is 90% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 18.13 | 0.56 |
| Recency | 14 December 2023 | 12 October 2009 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 40 nm |
The Arc 8-Cores iGPU is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 220 in performance tests.
Be aware that Arc 8-Cores iGPU is a notebook card while GeForce GT 220 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
