Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile vs Arc A310

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc A310 with RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Arc A310
2022
4 GB GDDR6, 75 Watt
14.28
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile
2024
4 GB GDDR6, 35 Watt
27.31
+91.2%

Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms Arc A310 by an impressive 91% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking368202
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.0553.47
ArchitectureGeneration 12.7 (2022−2023)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameDG2-128AD107
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date12 October 2022 (2 years ago)26 February 2024 (less than a year 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 cores7682048
Core clock speed2000 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speed2000 MHz2025 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate64.00129.6
Floating-point processing power3.072 TFLOPS8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs3264
Tensor Cores9664
Ray Tracing Cores616

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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x8
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1937 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth124.0 GB/s128.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.66.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.03.0
Vulkan1.31.3
CUDA-8.9

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Arc A310 14.28
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 27.31
+91.2%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Arc A310 11915
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 20239
+69.9%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Arc A310 46839
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 66297
+41.5%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Arc A310 8464
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 14136
+67%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Arc A310 3269
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 5278
+61.5%

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 HD37
−89.2%
70−75
+89.2%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
−87.5%
75−80
+87.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
−83.3%
55−60
+83.3%
Battlefield 5 55−60
−86.4%
110−120
+86.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
−80.6%
65−70
+80.6%
Far Cry 5 40−45
−90.5%
80−85
+90.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
−87.5%
90−95
+87.5%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
−85.8%
210−220
+85.8%
Hitman 3 35−40
−85.7%
65−70
+85.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
−81.8%
160−170
+81.8%
Metro Exodus 60−65
−77.4%
110−120
+77.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
−83.7%
90−95
+83.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
−86.4%
110−120
+86.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
−86%
160−170
+86%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
−87.5%
75−80
+87.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
−83.3%
55−60
+83.3%
Battlefield 5 55−60
−86.4%
110−120
+86.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
−80.6%
65−70
+80.6%
Far Cry 5 40−45
−90.5%
80−85
+90.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
−87.5%
90−95
+87.5%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
−85.8%
210−220
+85.8%
Hitman 3 35−40
−85.7%
65−70
+85.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
−81.8%
160−170
+81.8%
Metro Exodus 60−65
−77.4%
110−120
+77.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
−83.7%
90−95
+83.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65
−84.6%
120−130
+84.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
−82.9%
75−80
+82.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
−86%
160−170
+86%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
−87.5%
75−80
+87.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
−83.3%
55−60
+83.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
−80.6%
65−70
+80.6%
Far Cry 5 40−45
−90.5%
80−85
+90.5%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
−85.8%
210−220
+85.8%
Hitman 3 35−40
−85.7%
65−70
+85.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
−81.8%
160−170
+81.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 54
−85.2%
100−105
+85.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
−89.7%
55−60
+89.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
−86%
160−170
+86%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
−83.7%
90−95
+83.7%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
−91.2%
65−70
+91.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
−85.2%
50−55
+85.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−66.7%
30−33
+66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
−87.5%
30−33
+87.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
−75%
35−40
+75%
Far Cry 5 21−24
−90.5%
40−45
+90.5%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
−83.7%
180−190
+83.7%
Hitman 3 21−24
−90.5%
40−45
+90.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
−80.6%
65−70
+80.6%
Metro Exodus 30−35
−81.8%
60−65
+81.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
−85.7%
65−70
+85.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
−75%
35−40
+75%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
−85.2%
200−210
+85.2%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
−89.7%
55−60
+89.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
−66.7%
30−33
+66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−84.6%
24−27
+84.6%
Hitman 3 12−14
−84.6%
24−27
+84.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
−84.8%
170−180
+84.8%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−66.7%
30−33
+66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
−66.7%
30−33
+66.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−80%
18−20
+80%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
−77.8%
16−18
+77.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
−77.8%
16−18
+77.8%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−80%
18−20
+80%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−87.5%
45−50
+87.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
−84.2%
35−40
+84.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
−71.4%
12−14
+71.4%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−87.5%
30−33
+87.5%

This is how Arc A310 and Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

  • Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is 89% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.28 27.31
Recency 12 October 2022 26 February 2024
Chip lithography 6 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 35 Watt

Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile has a 91.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 20% more advanced lithography process, and 114.3% lower power consumption.

The RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A310 in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc A310 is a desktop card while RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 A310
Arc A310
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.7 254 votes

Rate Arc A310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 18 votes

Rate RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.