Riva TNT2 vs Arc A310

Place in the ranking	425	1592
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	13.38	no data
Architecture	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)	Fahrenheit (1998−2000)
GPU code name	DG2-128	NV5
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	12 October 2022 (3 years ago)	12 October 1999 (26 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	768	no data
Core clock speed	2000 MHz	125 MHz
Boost clock speed	2000 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	7,200 million	15 million
Manufacturing process technology	6 nm	250 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	64.00	0.25
Floating-point processing power	3.072 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	2
TMUs	32	2
Tensor Cores	96	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	6	no data
L1 Cache	1.1 MB	no data
L2 Cache	4 MB	no data

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	PCIe 4.0 x8	AGP 4x
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	GDDR6	SDR
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 MB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1937 MHz	150 MHz
Memory bandwidth	124.0 GB/s	2.4 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 outputs

1x VGA

API and SDK support

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_2)	6.0
Shader Model	6.6	no data
OpenGL	4.6	1.2
OpenCL	3.0	N/A
Vulkan	1.3	N/A
DLSS	+	-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

Arc A310 13.03
+130200%

Riva TNT2 0.01

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Arc A310 5451
+181600%

Samples: 54

Riva TNT2 3
Samples: 24

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

-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2	154	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30	0−1
Resident Evil 4 Remake	42	0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5	55−60	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	106	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30	0−1
Far Cry 5	51	0−1
Fortnite	75−80	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	55−60	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	40−45	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50	0−1
Valorant	110−120	0−1

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5	55−60	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	33	0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	180−190	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30	0−1
Far Cry 5	47	0−1
Fortnite	75−80	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	55−60	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	40−45	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	28	0−1
Metro Exodus	27−30	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	56	0−1
Valorant	110−120	0−1

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5	55−60	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30	0−1
Far Cry 5	44	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	55−60	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	29	0−1
Valorant	110−120	0−1

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite

75−80

0−1

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2	24−27	0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	95−100	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	20−22	0−1
Metro Exodus	16−18	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120	0−1
Valorant	130−140	0−1

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5	35−40	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12	0−1
Far Cry 5	27−30	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	30−35	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20	0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite

27−30

0−1

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2	9−10	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27	0−1
Metro Exodus	9−10	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20	0−1
Valorant	70−75	0−1

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5	18−20	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	9−10	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Far Cry 5	14−16	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	21−24	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14	0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite

12−14

0−1

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	13.03	0.01
Recency	12 October 2022	12 October 1999
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 MB
Chip lithography	6 nm	250 nm

Arc A310 has a 130200% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 23 years, a 25500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 4066.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A310 is our recommended choice as it beats the Riva TNT2 in performance tests.